Chris,
That's an interesting revelation about the speed difference... since
90% of what I've written is in FX and not the API, I can't really see
a difference, but I'm glad that you've told me that before I spread
inaccuracies... :)
Like Dale (and of course you, the esteemed author of this incredible
tool), I prefer FX.php; I find it more intuitive, easier to write for,
and eminently reliable as well.
Another thought just popped into my head about CDML: it's not as
bulletproof as FX.php. It's not so much that the code fails, because
that's not the issue; however, CDML requires more server-tending than
PHP does--PHP requires practically none. There is a memory leak in Web
Server Connector (this is what CDML uses to talk to FileMaker) that
will eventually cause a Mac to crash if a site gets a lot of traffic.
Oddly, it seems to come and go on our servers here; sometimes I've had
a lot of trouble with it, sometimes not, so I tend to think that it's
traffic-related.
Also, for CDML, you need to run FileMaker Pro Unlimited 5 or 6, in
addition to FileMaker Server, which should definitely be used as well;
on top of that add a web server, and you're involving three machines
just to host the web app. When you edit a page, you have to upload it
to both the web server AND the FileMaker Unlimited machine, which
makes site-updating much more tedious. When using multi-machine
setups, as we do, this means uploading a single page to 3 or more
machines each time.
Bob Patin
Longterm Solutions
[hidden email]
615-333-6858
http://www.longtermsolutions.comFileMaker 9 Certified Developer
Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet
CONTACT US VIA INSTANT MESSAGING:
AIM or iChat: longterm1954
Yahoo: longterm_solutions
MSN:
[hidden email]
ICQ: 159333060
--------------------------
Contact us for FileMaker hosting and programming for all versions of
FileMaker
PHP • CDML • Full email services • Free DNS hosting • Colocation •
Consulting
On May 27, 2008, at 10:26 AM, Chris Hansen wrote:
> Jorge,
>
> I'll chime in here...
>
> First off, the 8x speed difference between FX.php and the FileMaker
> API for PHP came from me originally (I think) and it's a bit
> misleading... Additional testing by myself and others has convinced
> me that this is the result of a performance throttle built into the
> FileMaker API for PHP in the development license of FMS that TechNet
> subscribers receive. I'm still hoping to test this more, but I
> don't presently have a full license that I can use for testing.
> However, I haven't seen anyone dispute that FX.php IS notably faster.
>
> Though I am biased towards FX.php, my take has always been examine
> the options and use what works best for you. Some people find
> development with one tool or another much more to their taste, and
> after all, you're the one who has to live with the tools that you
> choose =) And since FileMaker's API and FX.php (as well as another
> open source option called FM-and-PHP) are PHP based, much of what
> you'll need to know is shared in common -- a lot of what you'll do
> is data manipulation and display, not just interaction with the
> database. I spent 5 years with Lasso before I created FX, I was
> part of a very small community group that assisted with the
> development of FileMaker's API, and I still prefer FX... There are
> those who prefer XSLT... Some people swear by Lasso... YMMV... Try
> out the options and see what you think.
>
> HTH
>
> --Chris Hansen
> FileMaker 8 Certified Developer
> FileMaker 7 Certified Developer
> Creator of FX.php
> "The best way from FileMaker to the Web."
> www.iViking.org
>
> On May 27, 2008, at 8:55 AM, Bob Patin wrote:
>> Jorge,
>>
>> I echo what Tim has said about FX.php; keep in mind that neither
>> the FM API nor FX.php are plugins, per se, but rather a set of PHP
>> libraries that you use to interact with FileMaker's Web Publishing
>> Engine.
>>
>> I can't imagine considering CDML at this point, although I wrote a
>> lot of sites with it (in fact, Tim was my best source of help when
>> I got stuck). Most FileMaker hosting companies are moving away from
>> hosting CDML sites; we had over 100 databases using CDML at one
>> time, and now we have only 9, mainly because we've migrated most of
>> these to FileMaker 9.
>>
>> In tests run by other consultants, FX.php came up approximately 8x
>> faster than the FileMaker API; these are not my numbers, as I've
>> never done any testing.
>>
>> As to which is easier to learn, that's a toss-up; I've been doing
>> FX a lot longer, so I prefer it probably because I'm more
>> proficient with it than with the API, but both achieve the same
>> results, just using a different method. However, once you get
>> familiar with PHP, you can work in both as needed.
>>
>> As Tim pointed out, unless you want to upgrade to at least
>> FileMaker 7 (which you'd have a hard time finding), FX.php is your
>> only option for PHP interfacing with FileMaker.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Bob Patin
>> Longterm Solutions
>>
[hidden email]
>> 615-333-6858
>>
http://www.longtermsolutions.com>> FileMaker 9 Certified Developer
>> Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet
>>
>> CONTACT US VIA INSTANT MESSAGING:
>> AIM or iChat: longterm1954
>> Yahoo: longterm_solutions
>> MSN:
[hidden email]
>> ICQ: 159333060
>>
>> --------------------------
>> Contact us for FileMaker hosting and programming for all versions
>> of FileMaker
>> PHP • CDML • Full email services • Free DNS hosting • Colocation •
>> Consulting
>>
>> On May 27, 2008, at 12:02 AM, Tim 'Webko' Booth wrote:
>>
>>>> - Is the FM-PHP-API the only one plug in / API supported for
>>>> managing FM Databases on the web? (I know can be done with XMl,
>>>> XLST without the API and with Lasso (in my case Lasso didn't
>>>> worked on my configuration and I could not test it)).
>>>
>>> No - I use the FX.php class quite happily, which also plugs in
>>> through the XML stream, which has been available since at least FM
>>> 5.5 (when did XML become a supported format? Since then...)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I Have some clients of small companies that invested on FM5/FM6
>>>> Server and that have applications that are running real fine but
>>>> would like to do some deployment of information or be able to
>>>> give access over the Internet to clients or providers to their
>>>> process. For those kind of clients......
>>>>
>>>> - The only path to follow is to upgrade ALL to FM9 or above and
>>>> move to the PHP-API ? (almost forbidden for the cost of licenses
>>>> and the job involved)
>>>
>>> No.
>>>
>>> If they're on FM5/6, then CDML is still an option (if you can find
>>> a copy of FM Unlimited these days...)
>>>
>>> FX.php is effectively free and can be used on any XML enabled
>>> FileMaker system, although the exact set up will vary quite
>>> considerable depending on exactly which versions are being used.
>>>
>>> You're not tied to the API, although I would suspect that future
>>> releases will have more and more goodies bundled with the API
>>> rather than being developed for any other approach/web technology.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Webko
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> FMPexperts mailing list
>>
[hidden email]
>>
http://lists.ironclad.net.au/listinfo.cgi/fmpexperts-ironclad.net.au>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FMPexperts mailing list
>
[hidden email]
>
http://lists.ironclad.net.au/listinfo.cgi/fmpexperts-ironclad.net.au_______________________________________________
FMPexperts mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ironclad.net.au/listinfo.cgi/fmpexperts-ironclad.net.au
