Windows 2003 Server and OpenEmr

hukutas wrote on Sunday, April 09, 2006:

I have two servers

Server One

Windows server 2003 standard edition
SP 1
xampp-win32-1.4.13.zip
openemr-2.8.1.tar.gz

First Server has Apache web server running, not mysql.

Server two

Identical to Server 1 except Apache is not running but mysql is running.

I am using server 1 to host the website and data is being stored on server 2.

All base openEmr is running, however when ever you log in the calendar takes about 30 seconds to load also when you leave the main page and go back the calendar again takes at least 30 seconds to load. Everything else is quick.

The entire network is nothing more then the two win2003 servers and a linksys router.

Anyone have any idea on why the calendar takes so extremely long to load on this topology?

Please no "you should Switch to Linux" answers.

Also Next I am going ot get FreeB, Postgre and Sql-Ledger working anyone with any howto’s or advice would be helpful.

Thanks Again.

drbowen wrote on Monday, April 10, 2006:

The calender uses the SmartyClasses and is already known to be big clunky and slow.  I think it is just the nature of the current calendar.

Replacing the current calendar with a quicker more agile version is on the developers todo list.

Why not duplicate the topology.

Win2003 - Apache - MySQL - OpenEMR

on both machines.  It is easy to set up replication with MySQL on the second server.

This will increase your calendar speed and give you improved fault tolerance. 

If you lose a controller card or have a lightning strike that trashes your first server then you just have all your clients point to the back-up server.  This is what I have setup ion my office.

This does not protect from legitimate SQL queries that damage the database (whether intentional or unintentional). 

I unintentionally changed all the birthdays of everyone in my practice to 05-06-1908. oops.

So now I have three copies of my database.  The first two copies replicate every 60 seconds.  The third copy is replicated once every twenty four hours. (to help guard against malicious SQL queries.)

hukutas wrote on Monday, April 10, 2006:

I guess what I was going to is just a seperation of the DB from the web server.

I am not sure of Current and future Hippa regs. So I was just going for super secure.

Site-to-Site VPN with Raduis Auth, Windows GPO on Organization Unit with permissions only to directory folder in httdocs (In this case openemr)then config sqlconf to remote connect to mysql DB on same LAN segment using encryption.

This way if I wanted to setup a second location, I can keep them completly independent from one another.

This way I can lock down a user to a certain folder on the webserver from my DC, then I can only allow connections to Db from web server IP/Mac address of course with correct credentials which are encrypted on the LAN segment to avoid sniffing.

hukutas wrote on Monday, April 10, 2006:

This is of course with the servers offsite, then at the office all I need is a FW with site-to-site VPN to the servers which will be placed in a datacenter.

And then some thin clients…

** I am not a Doctor, but was asked to set this up. So I fugured if I am going to set it up once I should go ahead and try and make a topology that is scalable, in case in the future others ask me to set this up for them. Then I can simply add them in, totally independent of one another.

drbowen wrote on Monday, April 10, 2006:

What you propose seems very reasonable (except fot calendar not cooperating).

Virtual hosting off the same server will give good isolation of the different installations and improve your calendar speed.

Server1
   c:\xampp\htdocs\site1\openemr
   c:\xampp\htdocs\site2\openemr
   c:\xampp\htdocs\site3\openemr

with all mysql databases on Server1
as separate mysql databases.

This won’t give you as much security but will solve the speed problem.

Assuming that the calendar does get fixed in the future you can decide then if you want to go to your original architecture.

Most ISPs are just running virtual hosting.

Sam Bowen

hukutas wrote on Monday, April 10, 2006:

I think Virtual server is probably best as it would probably be easier when trying to cross the freeb - sql Ledger hurdle.

Will continue to check into it and see…

I am still a little unclear on getting billing working though, any good articles / Howto’s out there?

Thanks for all the Help