Re: Using Native VFP Tables and Network Performance
- From: "Paul Hemans" <darwin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2008 18:34:33 +1100
There are posts on fox.wikis.com that have analysed this subject to death.
Here are a couple of design ideas:
Ultimately, passing data and indexes across a network is not a good thing.
Sometimes unavoidable but still not a good thing. It is fairly simple to
test, just sit at the server and run the application there is no way you
will get the same data performance on one of the workstations. That is why
Terminal Services is such a great thing for VFP apps that don't use a
client-server model, but it does require sufficient resources on the server
to handle the user sessions.
Take the tables that don't change and create a startup system that checks
for the 'static' tables (existence, date/time) on the local machines and
pulls new versions from the server. That way the only data that is moving
across the network is the data that is likely to change.
If you are using SQL for all your db requests then you could move to a
client-server model where only the result set is passed across the network
such as SQL server. Or you could use VFP in a distributed computing model
where a VFP service is on the server receving requests and sending out
results. To my understanding it is really the indexes that chew up the
network bandwidth.
The best results are found in a thin client app (such as a web app) because
the server only works when it has to, unfortunately that usually involves a
complete rewrite of the interface.
Hope that helps.
"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:7rCdnQFHU8jMpGjanZ2dnUVZ_h2pnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello and thanks in advance for the help.
We are using VFP 7.0 SP1 and native VFP tables. All users are running Win
XP Pro SP2 and our file server is running Win 2003 Server.
We are running a network with about 30 users. Each user has 3 or 4 VFP
apps open with each app opening up to 40 tables. Most tables have memo
fields so each table opens 3 files. There are some forms with private data
sessions that open their own copies of from 25-30 tables (with memo
fields). Some of these forms are opened and closed repeatedly throughout
the day.
Are there any performance issues with using VFP tables and Win 2003 server
as I have outlined above? We are attempting to figure out why we are
having network performance issues and it has been suggested that the large
number of open files caused by the configuration that I have outlined
could be impacting network performance severely. Does anyone know if this
could be the case or if there are special configuration issues for Win
2003 Server that should be applied when using a large number of native VFP
tables.
Thank you very much.
Regards,
Jeff
.
- References:
- Using Native VFP Tables and Network Performance
- From: Jeff Grippe
- Using Native VFP Tables and Network Performance
- Prev by Date: Re: Compiling FoxPro Programs
- Next by Date: Re: Embedded SQL and comments
- Previous by thread: Re: Using Native VFP Tables and Network Performance
- Next by thread: Re: Using Native VFP Tables and Network Performance
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
