Mac OS X Speed

Silvan Sommer's Avatar

Silvan Sommer

21 Apr, 2010 07:44 AM

Hello there,
I just cume up with the same speed problem. If you use the Plugin with FM Server and stored the capture in a Field, there is the speed problem. The Capture is about 156kb, and that slows down the reading process. I attached a sample File.
I tryed to dump the code local and restore from that file, but it is not faster... Do you see a chance to reduce the code lenght?

Thanks very much


  1. 1 Posted by Silvan Sommer on 21 Apr, 2010 12:54 PM

    Silvan Sommer's Avatar

    I just made a test on windows. The capture there is only about 50kb, that makes it very much faster. So the Mac Capture shout be so kind of compressed, that would help

  2. Support Staff 2 Posted by Support on 22 Apr, 2010 05:41 AM

    Support's Avatar

    Thanks for the feedback.

    We are examining the issue and will keep you informed when we have more info.

  3. 3 Posted by mark.cyrulik on 06 May, 2010 07:00 PM

    mark.cyrulik's Avatar

    We are experiencing the same speed issues. It seems to be MUCH faster on FM10 than on FM9. All the machines we are running are Mac OS X 10.5. Not sure if that info will be valuable to you.



  4. 4 Posted by Silvan Sommer on 07 May, 2010 07:51 AM

    Silvan Sommer's Avatar

    Hello Mark,
    Thanks. I'm using FM 10 und 11 on Mac OS 10.6. The speed looks to be the same. I Do not have a FM9 on my Mac anymore. I have a Idea to probably solve the problem. Cant you just save the setting code with a kind of zip, and then extrakt it befor executing in the plugin. That would make it as fast as windows, probalby even faster.

  5. Support Staff 5 Posted by Support on 07 May, 2010 08:18 AM

    Support's Avatar

    We are currently working on this issue. We'll keep you informed as soon as we have more information.

  6. Support Staff 6 Posted by Support on 02 Jun, 2010 07:45 AM

    Support's Avatar

    Just a quick question, have you checked whether indexing on the field where you store the print settings has been turned off ?

  7. 7 Posted by Silvan Sommer on 02 Jun, 2010 08:18 AM

    Silvan Sommer's Avatar

    I just tried both, first no index and now with full index. Makes no differenz. The Prozess takes about 20 Seconds

  8. 8 Posted by mark.cyrulik on 02 Jun, 2010 01:03 PM

    mark.cyrulik's Avatar

    The field has always been un-indexed for me.

  9. 9 Posted by Silvan on 02 Jun, 2010 01:11 PM

    Silvan's Avatar

    it dos not make any difference, indexed or not, takes always about 15-20 Secs with fm Server

  10. Support Staff 10 Posted by Support on 02 Jun, 2010 01:16 PM

    Support's Avatar

    Thank you very much for the quick reply. We'll keep you informed.

  11. 11 Posted by mark.cyrulik on 10 Jun, 2010 01:54 PM

    mark.cyrulik's Avatar


    I am sure that you guys are working on the issue, but I was wondering if you have any sort of a timeframe on a new build that might address the issue.


  12. Support Staff 12 Posted by Support on 17 Jun, 2010 07:15 AM

    Support's Avatar

    Hi guys,

    Enclosed is a new Mac build of the PrinterSwitch plug-in (no full installer build yet)

    This version now compresses the Mac capture data. However, we have been unable to check whether this really makes a difference.
    We would appreciate it if you could check this in your setup to see whether this helps solve the speed problem you have been having.

  13. 13 Posted by Silvan Sommer on 17 Jun, 2010 08:15 AM

    Silvan Sommer's Avatar

    Hello Luk,
    I just made the check. Print takes now about 16 Sec. It is a little faster, 2 Secs or so. I checked the data stored in Filemaker. There is the Datasize the same as bevor.
    It still has 156KB like in brevious version.
    The Problem of Speed is there. FM has some time to get the data from a field and send it to the Plugin. You see it when you just put the field in a layout an the click on it.
    To open the Field it takes also about 10-15 Secs.

    The solution could be in there, that you compress the capure data bever putting it in the FM Field. With that, we would have less data in the field an much more speed in printing.

    Thanks very much
    Kind regards

  14. Support Staff 14 Posted by Support on 17 Jun, 2010 08:49 AM

    Support's Avatar

    Are you sure the new version of the plug-in was loaded? Did you perform a new "capture" first ?

    As an example, I had a previous capture for our office printer take up about 51K in the settings field.
    If I now capture the same settings, the field has less than 3K in it, so you should also see this difference.

  15. 15 Posted by mark.cyrulik on 17 Jun, 2010 01:07 PM

    mark.cyrulik's Avatar


    I put the beta version in place for one user, and so far, the speed is MUCH faster, it's like normal printing. I am going to let her test it today, and if she has no issues, is it safe to roll out to other users, or should I wait for an official version release?

    Thanks for your help and support!


  16. Support Staff 16 Posted by Support on 17 Jun, 2010 01:26 PM

    Support's Avatar

    Other testers have already reported this as well.

    I guess it is safe to roll it out to other users - if we don't get any other comments, this build will most likely become version 2.0.2.

  17. Support closed this discussion on 17 Jun, 2010 01:26 PM.

Comments are currently closed for this discussion. You can start a new one.

Keyboard shortcuts


? Show this help
ESC Blurs the current field

Comment Form

r Focus the comment reply box
^ + ↩ Submit the comment

You can use Command ⌘ instead of Control ^ on Mac