> If you was choosing a server which would run a vfp application using
> standard dbfs
It won't be running a VFP application (unless it's the RDS server too), it'll
just be providing access to a shared folder with DBFs in it. So disk and
network throughput is very important.
--
Alan Bourke
Hi Alan
Yes sorry I didn't make it clear, this is an RDS server so the .exe and DBFs
will be on the same machine. So it sounds like the main consideration to make
the application work as quickly as possible is the disk.
Typically in the past we would have had 4 15k rpm HDD's running in a Rai
> Yes sorry I didn't make it clear, this is an RDS server so the .exe and DBFs
> will be on the same machine. So it sounds like the main consideration to
> make the application work as quickly as possible is the disk.
>
> Typically in the past we would have had 4 15k rpm HDD's running in a Ra
Thanks Christof, I think trying a Raid 10 array with 4 SSD's seems like a good
way forward for us as its not a massive change to the norm.
Thanks for your input.
Regards
Chris.
-Original Message-
From: ProfoxTech On Behalf Of Christof
Wollenhaupt
Sent: Tuesday, 24 November 2020 11:17
Alan
That's what the problem turned out to be ...
Paul
-Original Message-
From: ProfoxTech On Behalf Of Alan Bourke
Sent: 24 November 2020 07:38
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Problem with APPEND FROM TYPE DELIMITED
Sent by an external sender
--
Are
I have a customer who runs a process which is essentially chugging through a
huge DBF and doing some processing for each record. This is taking quite a
while on their hardware, like hours. It struck me that this is an ideal
application for parallelism. So I've knocked up a quick test that uses
6 matches
Mail list logo
