Hi Kirk, Very interesting.
Here are my experiences on running a 4D v17R5 server, client on Mac and windows: If you remember my presentation on the 2018 summit (with the SVG charts for temperature mapping), that is the one running on it. First setup: t2.micro on AWS, smallest possible and free ;-) Pros: Very reliable good for prototyping handling: quite ok, which has surprised me since it has only 1GB RAM ( ! ) Selection to array / array to selection: tested with + 100.000 records, not to bad (seconds rather than minutes) Lists are displayed in listboxes, using fields. Display is rather immediate. Detail forms load within 2 to 10 seconds, depending on how many queries in it Cons: bandwidth not always sufficient, which drops handling to a crawl, and also causes big delays when accessing the instance with RDP 2nd setup: m5.large, 8GB RAM, 2 cores. 160$/month Pros: Very reliable much better handling due to guaranteed bandwidth a *lot* faster than the t2.micro, very workable I also put 2 RDP users on it, because the server license includes 2 CALS. Works even better, even on a Mac! I studied what it would take to have more RDP users, but there, I get lost a little bit. From what I understood, I would need an RDP gateway, so another AWS instance, and then buy additional CALS for RDP. That sounds quite expensive… The other thing I tried recently is S3, because one of my applications manages a lot (+ 1,000,000) of documents. There is a 4Dsummit example that manages all the S3 stuff: very impressive! Storing and retrieving documents has never been so easy and fast. Cost is affordable (by EU standards ;-) ) I would love to here other AWS experiences. Regards, Rudy Mortier Two Way Communications bvba > On 13 Oct 2019, at 00:51, Kirk Brooks via 4D_Tech <4d_tech@lists.4d.com> > wrote: > > Hey Rudy, > I made a post yesterday on the thread about preemptive processes and how it > works on VM. Ping me if you can't find it. You may find it useful because I > posted some actual data from running a demo you can download. I ran it on > my laptop and an AWS instance. The general specs of the AWS instance are > there too. It shows the sort of differences I've been seeing. It seems the > issue with AWS is partly the sheer horsepower you sign up for in terms of > cores and such but equally important is the amount of bandwidth you commit > to. Impacts the performance and cost quickly. > > I'm hoping someone with more expertise in this might join the conversation. > (Balinder? you out there?) It's almost good for directly connecting. I > think if you are running 4D to power a web server it's quite good. Also, I > think if you deploy there optimizations you can make in code to > accommodate the network will become apparent. I quickly saw that places > where I move data from the server to the client and manipulate it on the > client are very speedy. ORDA is probably going to help with that. I'm also > curious if you can set up a situation that cost effective where you run an > instance for the server and then some others to support clients using RDP > or the like. > > It is certainly appealing. > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 2:28 PM Two Way Communications via 4D_Tech < > 4d_tech@lists.4d.com> wrote: > >> Hi Kirk, >> >> I am very interested on your progress with AWS. Can you tell me a little >> bit more about the kind of 4D DB you are running on it? >> Are you running client/server or using SQL? Do you notice speed >> differences between ORDA / Classic 4D? >> >> >> I’m asking because I am currently using AWS myself. The response is quite >> ok, but still way slower than LAN client server. >> I am thinking of putting more 4D databases on AWS. >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Rudy Mortier >> Two Way Communications bvba >> >> >> >>> On 10 Oct 2019, at 17:09, Kirk Brooks via 4D_Tech <4d_tech@lists.4d.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Peter, >>> I am in the process of moving a database from our own hardware to and AWS >>> instance. It's true that the most expensive part of setting it up, at >> this >>> point, is getting the appropriate amount of band width and throughput >> speed. >>> >>> The other thing about VM vs metal is the whole pre-emptive process >>> benefit basically goes away. Thomas Maul has shown this at the Summit. >>> Having n+ virtual cores doesn't do anything to actually increase >> processing >>> speed because the VM is running on whatever is allocated to it. >>> Theoretically you could have a VM with 4 cores running an instance with >> 32 >>> cores. So preemptive threading is looking to be mainly a benefit for >>> companies that run their own hardware and for desktop apps. >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 5:25 AM Peter Jakobsson via 4D_Tech < >>> 4d_tech@lists.4d.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi ! >>>> >>>> I just finished a 1.5 hour phonecall with a support services manager at >>>> the technical services company who supply one of my customers with all >>>> their hardware/software/maintenance services. >>>> >>>> He basically brought me up to date on “how things work” today which is >>>> essentially that everything to do with platforms is now virtualised to >>>> allow them to ‘tune’ resources to demand in realtime and provide >> seamless, >>>> no downtime backup. Basically, my 4d Server is now a “cloud service” >>>> without me even being aware of it, it’s just that the hardware involved >>>> happens to be located on the preises. >>>> >>>> In particular we discussed backup configurations for 4D server and this >>>> was interesting because, while I requested independent drives for >> logfile >>>> (“journal”) and datafile purposes, he essentially told me to just stick >>>> everything on the same drive because it was virtual anyway and had >> multiple >>>> redundancy protection via raid, 15-minute snapshotting etc. He offered >> to >>>> “create” a C: and a D: drive to make me feel better, but pointed out >> that >>>> they’re not much more independent than 2 folders would have been. >>>> >>>> CONCLUSON >>>> I now realise that the “WAN” / “LAN” distinction is disappearing. He >> said >>>> the only reason the “cloud” solution wasn’t hosted off-site was that >> they >>>> had measured the bandwidth that the customer used and calculated that >> the >>>> cost would be astronomical if it was on AWS or something like that, but >> in >>>> all other respects it was a cloud solution. >>>> >>>> I was wondering, how do other major 4D server deployers optimise their >>>> deployment strategies to take advantage of this ? It seems a great thing >>>> that we are being “floated out to the cloud” without actually having to >> do >>>> extra significant work, but what about things like the backup strategy >> ? I >>>> don’t really like the idea that the log file has the same redundancy >> system >>>> as the main datafile because the whole idea is that the corruption >> doesn’t >>>> get replicated (which is what a RAID system does) and it’s independent >> at >>>> the logical level. >>>> >>>> We seem one step away from being able to supply server solutions where >>>> “our” customer doesn’t have to host the database server on premises. Is >>>> anybody doing this at an advanced level ? (e.g. connecting with 4D >> client >>>> native to a 4D server that’s 3rd-party hosted). >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Peter >>>> >>>> ********************************************************************** >>>> 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) >>>> Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html >>>> Options: https://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech >>>> Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com >>>> ********************************************************************** >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Kirk Brooks >>> San Francisco, CA >>> ======================= >>> >>> What can be said, can be said clearly, >>> and what you can’t say, you should shut up about >>> >>> *Wittgenstein and the Computer * >>> ********************************************************************** >>> 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) >>> Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html >>> Options: https://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech >>> Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com >>> ********************************************************************** >> >> ********************************************************************** >> 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) >> Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html >> Options: https://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech >> Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com >> ********************************************************************** > > > > -- > Kirk Brooks > San Francisco, CA > ======================= > > What can be said, can be said clearly, > and what you can’t say, you should shut up about > > *Wittgenstein and the Computer * > ********************************************************************** > 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) > Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html > Options: https://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech > Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com > ********************************************************************** ********************************************************************** 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html Options: https://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com **********************************************************************
