Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
51 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Garren James
Does anyone have info, or insight to whether Filemaker SA 9.0.x is  
capable of matching MySQL's performance when :

Delivering plain data?
or
Calling images from FM Container Fields vs MySQL BLOB's?

I expect neither is considered a "good idea" but the synchronisation  
between Filemaker, MySQL and finally
the call to the actual image via the URL reference inside MySQL field  
is becoming a killer process...

It is my hope that Filemaker has progressed enough that I can flip  
BACK to using Filemaker ONLY to deliver
all data. Naturally we invented the Filemaker to MySQL synchronisation  
a few years back because Filemaker
'anything' was too slow to be practical on a big website...

I am remembering this Wiki article :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasso_(programming_language)#Lasso_5_-_7

Garren James

--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Tom Langton-2
I use FM as a datasource, but mostly my deployments are small with
comparatively tiny user base.

FM noticeably drags when data from layouts with multiple relationships are
accessed.

I use Supercontainer when sharing images with native FM and web solutions,
and use image references when the solution is web only. Assuming "killer
process" is a negative connotation, what's killing you about it? Between
ghostscript and imagemagick I can scale and reformat images on the fly with
reasonable performance (although getting the configs just right took some
time).

Supercontainer functions as a freestanding web server, in our case, running
on the same box as FMSA. SC will also generate thumbnails on the fly to any
dimension painlessly. The speed difference between native FM containers and
SC is jaw dropping, in a good way. I've never used blobs, but, obviously,
when you do that, as with FM, the size of the database grows tremendously,
as with FM, inviting db maintenance issues.

My 2 cents.

Tom Langton


On 2/18/10 9:08 AM, "Garren James" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Delivering plain data?
> or
> Calling images from FM Container Fields vs MySQL BLOB's?
>
> I expect neither is considered a "good idea" but the synchronisation
> between Filemaker, MySQL and finally
> the call to the actual image via the URL reference inside MySQL field
> is becoming a killer process...



--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

stevepiercy
In reply to this post by Garren James
On 2/18/10 at 4:08 PM, [hidden email] (Garren James) pronounced:

>Does anyone have info, or insight to whether Filemaker SA 9.0.x
>is capable of matching MySQL's performance when :
>
>Delivering plain data?
>or
>Calling images from FM Container Fields vs MySQL BLOB's?

FM is extremely slow compared to MySQL due to the WPE.  It's the
bottleneck when transmitting any amount of data per connection
above a few hundred Kb.

>I expect neither is considered a "good idea" but the
>synchronisation between Filemaker, MySQL and finally
>the call to the actual image via the URL reference inside MySQL
>field is becoming a killer process...

There are two fast ways:
* store a reference to the image filename (or filepath) in a
MySQL datasource, and serve the image from the file system.
* use the filesystem as a datasource with file_exists and other
file_ tags.
The latter becomes slow above a certain number of files or
directories within a directory, so test for your situation.  (I
think Jim Van Heule said it bogs down around 1,000.)  But it
does have the advantage of using the filesystem as the
authoritative datasource.

--steve

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
-- --
Steve Piercy               Web Site Builder              
Soquel, CA
<[hidden email]>                  <http://www.StevePiercy.com/>


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Jonathan Guthrie-5
Depends on who you're talking to Steve ;)
I'm sure Pier has "THE quote" around somewhere...


On 2010-02-18, at 3:13 PM, Steve Piercy - Web Site Builder wrote:

> FM is extremely slow compared to MySQL due to the WPE.  It's the bottleneck when transmitting any amount of data per connection above a few hundred Kb.


Jonathan Guthrie
Development Manager

Treefrog Interactive Inc.
"Bringing the Internet to Life"
www.treefrog.ca
[hidden email]
mob: 905-251-7373
ph: 905-836-4442 ext 110

ü Please consider the environment before printing this email.


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

stevepiercy
Uh-oh, here come the flying monkeys.

--steve


On 2/18/10 at 4:02 PM, [hidden email] (Jonathan Guthrie) pronounced:

> Depends on who you're talking to Steve ;)
> I'm sure Pier has "THE quote" around somewhere...
>
>
> On 2010-02-18, at 3:13 PM, Steve Piercy - Web Site Builder wrote:
>
> > FM is extremely slow compared to MySQL due to the WPE.  It's the bottleneck when
> transmitting any amount of data per connection above a few hundred Kb.

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Steve Piercy               Web Site Builder               Soquel, CA
<[hidden email]>                  <http://www.StevePiercy.com/>


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Pier Kuipers
In reply to this post by Jonathan Guthrie-5
In fact, I have two:

"FM is faster, I am sorry. I do not know, where people get the idea
about slow FM and fast MySQL."
Anatoli Kohout, 06/27/2003

"Nothing in FM takes more than 1 second."
Anatoli Kohout, June 2003

It still makes me smile :-)

Pier

On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Jonathan Guthrie <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Depends on who you're talking to Steve ;)
> I'm sure Pier has "THE quote" around somewhere...
>
>
> On 2010-02-18, at 3:13 PM, Steve Piercy - Web Site Builder wrote:
>
>> FM is extremely slow compared to MySQL due to the WPE.  It's the bottleneck when transmitting any amount of data per connection above a few hundred Kb.
>
>
> Jonathan Guthrie
> Development Manager
>
> Treefrog Interactive Inc.
> "Bringing the Internet to Life"
> www.treefrog.ca
> [hidden email]
> mob: 905-251-7373
> ph: 905-836-4442 ext 110
>
> ü Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
>
> --
> This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
> Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
> Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/
>
>
>



--
Pier Kuipers
Visual ID
Unit S02
Synergy Centre
ITT Tallaght
Dublin 24
Ireland
Tel. +353 1 9022 575
Mobile +353 87 294 3063
Web http://www.visualid.com

--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Mikael Sundström
Jesus - that "analysis" is really way out there. Filemaker 10 SA  
(which still sits right at the heart of my site) is so slow it makes  
my scalp tingle just thinking about it. Half my work is getting around  
this problem by means of nifty caches and variables holding data so I  
can minimise proper data access. I have one MySQL-solution, and it  
screams. No caching, no nothing, just go ahead and query the database  
on every occasion - it takes it in its stride.

Now, this problem is nothing new to put it mildly. Does anyone really  
know WHY Filemaker WPE is so sluggish - after all, this must be a  
complaint the FM people hear about every day when disgruntled  
developers point at MySQL? Secondly: FM can supposedly act as a front-
end for SQL data sources. That sounds like a marriage made in heaven,  
but have any of you really tried to set it up? What are the snags?

/Mike


19 feb 2010 kl. 01.15 skrev Pier Kuipers:

In fact, I have two:

"FM is faster, I am sorry. I do not know, where people get the idea
about slow FM and fast MySQL."
Anatoli Kohout, 06/27/2003

"Nothing in FM takes more than 1 second."
Anatoli Kohout, June 2003

It still makes me smile :-)

Pier

On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Jonathan Guthrie <[hidden email]>  
wrote:
Depends on who you're talking to Steve ;)
I'm sure Pier has "THE quote" around somewhere...


On 2010-02-18, at 3:13 PM, Steve Piercy - Web Site Builder wrote:

FM is extremely slow compared to MySQL due to the WPE.  It's the  
bottleneck when transmitting any amount of data per connection above a  
few hundred Kb.


Jonathan Guthrie
Development Manager

Treefrog Interactive Inc.
"Bringing the Internet to Life"
www.treefrog.ca
[hidden email]
mob: 905-251-7373
ph: 905-836-4442 ext 110

ü Please consider the environment before printing this email.


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/






--
Pier Kuipers
Visual ID
Unit S02
Synergy Centre
ITT Tallaght
Dublin 24
Ireland
Tel. +353 1 9022 575
Mobile +353 87 294 3063
Web http://www.visualid.com

--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/



--------------------------------------------------
Mikael Sundström
Ph D | Senior Lecturer
Department of Political Science
Lund University
Lund
Sweden

tel. +46 46 2224993 | +46 705 811703
fax. +46 46 2224006
e-mail: [hidden email]
--------------------------------------------------





--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Neil Enock
My  Filemaker Server 10A  is blazing fast - on the filemaker side.  Not so much on the web side. Since my business is web-based, it is slow and must be monitored constantly.  It is to the point of crashing 3-4 times per day - PER DAY!  And this is not a busy server.

Filemaker's ability to handle web traffic has become increasingly poorer over the last few releases.  It is fine one request at a time, but all hell breaks loose should two people actually need database access at the same time.  It gets worse as you get higher numbers of course.

In addition, the new FMS admin console is Java based and It too is buggy in the extreme. It crashes at least once a week, sometimes in response to a WPE crash, sometime all by itself.

I still believe Filemaker is one of the best, if not the best, quick database design tool, letting you get running right away with almost no experience.  As you say it is too bad they do not seem to be interested in business delivered by the internet.  An odd stance for an Apple company!

BTW, filemaker's only support suggestion regarding the problems was to switch to a PHP based solution.  

I chose to ignore that and so am now busy learning MySQL - and hoping that ODBC will be fast enough to support the relatively minimal desktop Filemaker access that I and my clients actually need.

My perfect scenario is the datasource as MySQL with Lasso interfacing to the web and Filemaker interfacing to the desktop.  We'll see how it goes.  I have an integrated system of 50+ databases to deal with.

Neil

--
    Chromata: Custom B2C, B2B Website Design, Hosting & Marketing
                       ePrint-Network: i-t-p:  internet to Print
             Cribscapes.com:  Incredible 3D Cribbage Boards!

ph 403.452.5253         http://www.chromata.com         [hidden email]
fx 403.398.1511         http://www.ePrint-Network.com   [hidden email]




On Feb 18, 2010, at 5:28 PM, Mikael Sundström wrote:

> Jesus - that "analysis" is really way out there. Filemaker 10 SA (which still sits right at the heart of my site) is so slow it makes my scalp tingle just thinking about it. Half my work is getting around this problem by means of nifty caches and variables holding data so I can minimise proper data access. I have one MySQL-solution, and it screams. No caching, no nothing, just go ahead and query the database on every occasion - it takes it in its stride.
>
> Now, this problem is nothing new to put it mildly. Does anyone really know WHY Filemaker WPE is so sluggish - after all, this must be a complaint the FM people hear about every day when disgruntled developers point at MySQL? Secondly: FM can supposedly act as a front-end for SQL data sources. That sounds like a marriage made in heaven, but have any of you really tried to set it up? What are the snags?
>
> /Mike
>
>
> 19 feb 2010 kl. 01.15 skrev Pier Kuipers:
>
> In fact, I have two:
>
> "FM is faster, I am sorry. I do not know, where people get the idea
> about slow FM and fast MySQL."
> Anatoli Kohout, 06/27/2003
>
> "Nothing in FM takes more than 1 second."
> Anatoli Kohout, June 2003
>
> It still makes me smile :-)
>
> Pier
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Jonathan Guthrie <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Depends on who you're talking to Steve ;)
> I'm sure Pier has "THE quote" around somewhere...
>
>
> On 2010-02-18, at 3:13 PM, Steve Piercy - Web Site Builder wrote:
>
> FM is extremely slow compared to MySQL due to the WPE.  It's the bottleneck when transmitting any amount of data per connection above a few hundred Kb.
>
>
> Jonathan Guthrie
> Development Manager
>
> Treefrog Interactive Inc.
> "Bringing the Internet to Life"
> www.treefrog.ca
> [hidden email]
> mob: 905-251-7373
> ph: 905-836-4442 ext 110
>
> ü Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
>
> --
> This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
> Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
> Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Pier Kuipers
> Visual ID
> Unit S02
> Synergy Centre
> ITT Tallaght
> Dublin 24
> Ireland
> Tel. +353 1 9022 575
> Mobile +353 87 294 3063
> Web http://www.visualid.com
>
> --
> This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
> Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
> Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> Mikael Sundström
> Ph D | Senior Lecturer
> Department of Political Science
> Lund University
> Lund
> Sweden
>
> tel. +46 46 2224993 | +46 705 811703
> fax. +46 46 2224006
> e-mail: [hidden email]
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
> Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
> Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/
>
>


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Robert Carpenter
In reply to this post by Pier Kuipers
On Feb 18, 2010, at 4:15 PM, Pier Kuipers wrote:
> "FM is faster, I am sorry. I do not know, where people get the idea
> about slow FM and fast MySQL."
> Anatoli Kohout, 06/27/2003

I remember that guy! I always pictured him in a lab coat, tucked away  
in a remote Russian mountain-top laboratory, doing crazy experiments  
to make FileMaker somehow perform at amazing speeds.

-robert-
   

--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

stevepiercy
In reply to this post by Mikael Sundström
On 2/19/10 at 1:28 AM, [hidden email] (Mikael
Sundström) pronounced:

>Now, this problem is nothing new to put it mildly. Does anyone
>really know WHY Filemaker WPE is so sluggish

Look at responses from the WPE.  It's all in XML, which is a
bloated way of transmitting data.  Forming and parsing XML is a
slow process itself.

Also look at this, p.21:
http://www.filemaker.com/downloads/documentation/fms10_getting_started_en.pdf
The diagram illustrates the required components to do web deployments:
* PHP engine (or Lasso FMS connector)
* FM web server module
* FM web publishing engine

A request has to go through those layers twice, once on the
request and once more on the response.  That doesn't include the
slowness of FM as a database server.

Trying to optimize FM for the web is like polishing a turd.

>Secondly: FM can supposedly act as a front-end for SQL data sources.
>That sounds like a marriage made in heaven, but have any of you really
>tried to set it up? What are the snags?

Yes it can, but there are limitations.  It is good as a
lightweight frontend to MySQL datasources.  Performing
operations on more than a few hundred records through ESS is
painfully slow.  You cannot edit the schema of MySQL datasources
through ESS.  Some field types are not supported (BLOB).  I'm
sure there a few other snags.

--steve

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
-- --
Steve Piercy               Web Site Builder              
Soquel, CA
<[hidden email]>                  <http://www.StevePiercy.com/>


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Garren James
In reply to this post by Garren James
Holly cow!

Obviously hit on a nerve here....I see the opinions differ as much as  
the Bush vs Obamah administrations!

So there is some (few) opinions that FMSA 10 is stable and fast but  
for the most part everyone seems to NOT like FMSA anything for heavy  
duty use, and even less for heavy duty use WITH pictures.

I notice those who did NOT like FMSA did not specify their VERSION. So  
I'm uncertain as to whether we should upgrade to FMSA 10? That is to  
say that this version is an improvement or not?

I do notice that the real people "in the know" have not cast any  
opinions, so a shout out to Fletcher and Kerry here can we have some  
input. Not wanting to put you on the spot here as I remember FileMaker  
has historically not gone particularly out of their way to make  
Lasso / FM integration easy but what is your best advice?



On 18 Feb 2010, at 16:08, Garren James wrote:

> Does anyone have info, or insight to whether Filemaker SA 9.0.x is  
> capable of matching MySQL's performance when :
>
> Delivering plain data?
> or
> Calling images from FM Container Fields vs MySQL BLOB's?
>
> I expect neither is considered a "good idea" but the synchronisation  
> between Filemaker, MySQL and finally
> the call to the actual image via the URL reference inside MySQL  
> field is becoming a killer process...
>
> It is my hope that Filemaker has progressed enough that I can flip  
> BACK to using Filemaker ONLY to deliver
> all data. Naturally we invented the Filemaker to MySQL  
> synchronisation a few years back because Filemaker
> 'anything' was too slow to be practical on a big website...
>
> I am remembering this Wiki article :
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasso_(programming_language)#Lasso_5_-_7
>
> Garren James


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Viaduct Productions
In reply to this post by Robert Carpenter
Hey, lab coats are for real scientists.  Computer people love Mountain Dew and Star Trak.  


On 2010-02-18, at 9:18 PM, Robert Carpenter wrote:

> I remember that guy! I always pictured him in a lab coat, tucked away in a remote Russian mountain-top laboratory, doing crazy experiments to make FileMaker somehow perform at amazing speeds.



_____________
Rich in Toronto


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Viaduct Productions
In reply to this post by stevepiercy
On 2010-02-18, at 10:19 PM, Steve Piercy - Web Site Builder wrote:

> Trying to optimize FM for the web is like polishing a turd.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiJ9fy1qSFI

It's just mud in a fridge that makes the science.  Perhaps the FMP people know about this.  I'm sure Ballmer's strategy is all about this.  

FileMaker gloves at 2:18?

FMP's primary purpose is to serve their market, which means the GUI be king.  

_____________
Rich in Toronto


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Kerry Adams-2
In reply to this post by Garren James
We try to stay database neutral, letting developers choose their own
tools to get the job done as they best see fit.

But what do we tell people when they ask us, point blank, which database
to choose?

We tell them:

FileMaker, if a friendly GUI is most important

MySQL (and others), if performance is most important

There are probably some developers who would quickly point out that
there are various cocoa based GUIs available for MySQL.

:-)

I could opine about the direction and state of the FileMaker/Lasso
relationship over the past few years, but I shall refrain.

-Kerry



Garren James wrote:

> Holly cow!
>
> Obviously hit on a nerve here....I see the opinions differ as much as
> the Bush vs Obamah administrations!
>
> So there is some (few) opinions that FMSA 10 is stable and fast but
> for the most part everyone seems to NOT like FMSA anything for heavy
> duty use, and even less for heavy duty use WITH pictures.
>
> I notice those who did NOT like FMSA did not specify their VERSION. So
> I'm uncertain as to whether we should upgrade to FMSA 10? That is to
> say that this version is an improvement or not?
>
> I do notice that the real people "in the know" have not cast any
> opinions, so a shout out to Fletcher and Kerry here can we have some
> input. Not wanting to put you on the spot here as I remember FileMaker
> has historically not gone particularly out of their way to make Lasso
> / FM integration easy but what is your best advice?
>
>
>
> On 18 Feb 2010, at 16:08, Garren James wrote:
>
>> Does anyone have info, or insight to whether Filemaker SA 9.0.x is
>> capable of matching MySQL's performance when :
>>
>> Delivering plain data?
>> or
>> Calling images from FM Container Fields vs MySQL BLOB's?
>>
>> I expect neither is considered a "good idea" but the synchronisation
>> between Filemaker, MySQL and finally
>> the call to the actual image via the URL reference inside MySQL field
>> is becoming a killer process...
>>
>> It is my hope that Filemaker has progressed enough that I can flip
>> BACK to using Filemaker ONLY to deliver
>> all data. Naturally we invented the Filemaker to MySQL
>> synchronisation a few years back because Filemaker
>> 'anything' was too slow to be practical on a big website...
>>
>> I am remembering this Wiki article :
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasso_(programming_language)#Lasso_5_-_7
>>
>> Garren James
>
>
> --
> This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
> Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
> Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/
>
>

--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Lars A. Gundersen-2
In reply to this post by Garren James

On 19. feb. 2010, at 08.46, Garren James wrote:

> Obviously hit on a nerve here....I see the opinions differ as much as the Bush vs Obama administrations!

Hm, not really, AFAICS. Discounting the discountinued but quoted Mr. Kohout, of course.

> So there is some (few) opinions that FMSA 10 is stable and fast but for the most part everyone seems to NOT like FMSA anything for heavy duty use, and even less for heavy duty use WITH pictures.

I have one site deployed with FM as the backend. As other people have noted, I have to use Lasso caching galore to approach anything resembling acceptable performance. It's a reference type site with a staff of editors, so a cache expiry of approx an hour is ok. Using FM as a backend for any kind of webapp with user input? I'd rather move to Sweden for a year!

> I notice those who did NOT like FMSA did not specify their VERSION. So I'm uncertain as to whether we should upgrade to FMSA 10? That is to say that this version is an improvement or not?

My experience is that with each new version they promise blazing fast speeds. It never materializes. So you should take that as an answer rather than an ambiguity.

> I do notice that the real people "in the know" have not cast any opinions, so a shout out to Fletcher and Kerry here can we have some input. Not wanting to put you on the spot here as I remember FileMaker has historically not gone particularly out of their way to make Lasso / FM integration easy but what is your best advice?

Ouch. I''d consider the people already answering this real people, and in the know. :-) So unless you have concrete reasons not to, I'd suggest the filename ref. in mySQL table and image file in filesystem approach.
Fletcher hasn't written on the list since late October, BTW.

Lars
--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Viaduct Productions
In reply to this post by Kerry Adams-2

On 2010-02-19, at 3:40 AM, Kerry Adams wrote:

> I could opine about the direction and state of the FileMaker/Lasso relationship over the past few years, but I shall refrain.

Perhaps re-establish communications with the Hypercard people?  "Hypercard is 10,000x faster than FMP"…I once did a heard.  

_____________
Rich in Toronto


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

stevepiercy
In reply to this post by Garren James
First of all, the THE QUOTE is long-running inside joke.  That
claim has been renounced and ridiculed for years, and is now the
stuff of legend.

Most folks agree on the following points:
* FMS as a desktop server-client application is great.
* It's pretty good if you have a controlled and limited load for
web access.  Instant Web Publishing is pretty sweet for that.
* If you need stability and speed for anything more demanding
than small loads over the web through Custom Web Publishing
(PHP, Lasso, etc.), then FMS will frustrate and disappoint you.

--steve


On 2/19/10 at 9:46 AM, [hidden email] (Garren James) pronounced:

>Holly cow!
>
>Obviously hit on a nerve here....I see the opinions differ as
>much as the Bush vs Obamah administrations!
>
>So there is some (few) opinions that FMSA 10 is stable and fast
>but for the most part everyone seems to NOT like FMSA anything
>for heavy duty use, and even less for heavy duty use WITH pictures.
>
>I notice those who did NOT like FMSA did not specify their
>VERSION. So I'm uncertain as to whether we should upgrade to
>FMSA 10? That is to say that this version is an improvement or not?
>
>I do notice that the real people "in the know" have not cast
>any opinions, so a shout out to Fletcher and Kerry here can we
>have some input. Not wanting to put you on the spot here as I
>remember FileMaker has historically not gone particularly out
>of their way to make Lasso / FM integration easy but what is
>your best advice?
>
>
>
>On 18 Feb 2010, at 16:08, Garren James wrote:
>
>>Does anyone have info, or insight to whether Filemaker SA
>>9.0.x is capable of matching MySQL's performance when :
>>
>>Delivering plain data?
>>or
>>Calling images from FM Container Fields vs MySQL BLOB's?
>>
>>I expect neither is considered a "good idea" but the
>>synchronisation between Filemaker, MySQL and finally
>>the call to the actual image via the URL reference inside
>>MySQL field is becoming a killer process...
>>
>>It is my hope that Filemaker has progressed enough that I can
>>flip BACK to using Filemaker ONLY to deliver
>>all data. Naturally we invented the Filemaker to MySQL
>>synchronisation a few years back because Filemaker
>>'anything' was too slow to be practical on a big website...
>>
>>I am remembering this Wiki article :
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasso_(programming_language)#Lasso_5_-_7
>>
>>Garren James
>
>
>--
>This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
>Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
>Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/
>
>

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
-- --
Steve Piercy               Web Site Builder              
Soquel, CA
<[hidden email]>                  <http://www.StevePiercy.com/>


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

stevepiercy
In reply to this post by Lars A. Gundersen-2
On 2/19/10 at 9:48 AM, [hidden email] (Lars A Gundersen) pronounced:

>On 19. feb. 2010, at 08.46, Garren James wrote:
>
>>So there is some (few) opinions that FMSA 10 is stable and fast but
>>for the most part everyone seems to NOT like FMSA anything for heavy
>>duty use, and even less for heavy duty use WITH pictures.
>
>I have one site deployed with FM as the backend. As other people have
>noted, I have to use Lasso caching galore to approach anything
>resembling acceptable performance. It's a reference type site with a
>staff of editors, so a cache expiry of approx an hour is ok. Using FM
>as a backend for any kind of webapp with user input? I'd rather move
>to Sweden for a year!

One more cool thing about FMS: a good portion of my income comes
from panicked FMS users whose sites crash and need to be
optimized, either through the above mentioned techniques or by
migrating to MySQL.

--steve

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
-- --
Steve Piercy               Web Site Builder              
Soquel, CA
<[hidden email]>                  <http://www.StevePiercy.com/>


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Viaduct Productions
In reply to this post by stevepiercy

On 2010-02-19, at 3:55 AM, Steve Piercy - Web Site Builder wrote:

> First of all, the THE QUOTE is long-running inside joke.  That claim has been renounced and ridiculed for years, and is now the stuff of legend.
>
> Most folks agree on the following points:
> * FMS as a desktop server-client application is great.

Except for the one person whose FMSA application over a WAN servers a huge 12 people at a time.  

> * It's pretty good if you have a controlled and limited load for web access.  Instant Web Publishing is pretty sweet for that.
> * If you need stability and speed for anything more demanding than small loads over the web through Custom Web Publishing (PHP, Lasso, etc.), then FMS will frustrate and disappoint you.



_____________
Rich in Toronto


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Filemaker vs MySQL : Retrieve Data and Images - A question of Speed?

Mikael Sundström
In reply to this post by Lars A. Gundersen-2
@Garren James:

Hear hear. If you will ever find a consensus, this is it: Filemaker is  
ridiculously slow if you are to pipe data via WPE. I am on version 10  
and can't say it has brought any measurable improvement speedwise. I  
should perhaps add that I love Filemaker in all other respects - it is  
remarkably easy and intuitive to set up complicated relational stuff  
in FM. For my money, there is nothing else out there that matches  
these crucial benefits. But I find it mindboggling that they would a)  
allow the WPE to continue to be such a speed hog (there must be  
something they can do in spite of the obvious parsing complications),  
and b) why they can't allow other piping options. When I started out I  
seem to recall that there was some sort of Lasso plugin that did the  
lifting on the FM end, and that was soooo much faster. This option was  
apparently snatched away by FM, or surely Lassosoft would have  
remedied the situation.

/Mike

19 feb 2010 kl. 09.48 skrev Lars A Gundersen:


On 19. feb. 2010, at 08.46, Garren James wrote:

Obviously hit on a nerve here....I see the opinions differ as much as  
the Bush vs Obama administrations!

Hm, not really, AFAICS. Discounting the discountinued but quoted Mr.  
Kohout, of course.

So there is some (few) opinions that FMSA 10 is stable and fast but  
for the most part everyone seems to NOT like FMSA anything for heavy  
duty use, and even less for heavy duty use WITH pictures.

I have one site deployed with FM as the backend. As other people have  
noted, I have to use Lasso caching galore to approach anything  
resembling acceptable performance. It's a reference type site with a  
staff of editors, so a cache expiry of approx an hour is ok. Using FM  
as a backend for any kind of webapp with user input? I'd rather move  
to Sweden for a year!

I notice those who did NOT like FMSA did not specify their VERSION. So  
I'm uncertain as to whether we should upgrade to FMSA 10? That is to  
say that this version is an improvement or not?

My experience is that with each new version they promise blazing fast  
speeds. It never materializes. So you should take that as an answer  
rather than an ambiguity.

I do notice that the real people "in the know" have not cast any  
opinions, so a shout out to Fletcher and Kerry here can we have some  
input. Not wanting to put you on the spot here as I remember FileMaker  
has historically not gone particularly out of their way to make  
Lasso / FM integration easy but what is your best advice?

Ouch. I''d consider the people already answering this real people, and  
in the know. :-) So unless you have concrete reasons not to, I'd  
suggest the filename ref. in mySQL table and image file in filesystem  
approach.
Fletcher hasn't written on the list since late October, BTW.

Lars
--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/



--------------------------------------------------
Mikael Sundström
Ph D | Senior Lecturer
Department of Political Science
Lund University
Lund
Sweden

tel. +46 46 2224993 | +46 705 811703
fax. +46 46 2224006
e-mail: [hidden email]
--------------------------------------------------





--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/Lasso/


123