Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- From: <fc9a9f82-2129692850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:33:09 +0200
Hi
I havent been givnen the time to try out your suggestions yet. I hope to do
that next week.
The machines that is having problems are both w2k pro and wxp pro and the
client machines log we sent was from a wxp pro and I think that was a
swedish operation system. So I will have to continue this with you as there
is no Swedish Microsoft support forum. If this will be a issue i will get
there and install an english client to be doing the errorsearching on.
You said that the Win2Ks log is a non english version, if you are reffering
to the Windows 2000 server in site A (Server A) that is a English
installation, the w2k3 server is an English version too, the wxp pro client
is the only non-english system that we are involving in this problemsolving
situation...
I will get back to you as soon as possible with more answeres.
Best Regards
Perra
"Amanda Wang [MSFT]" <v-amanwa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:7niWZbzcFHA.3404@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hi,
>
> How are things going on your side after trying my previous suggestions?
>
> I have performed further research on your issue and found the following
> things we need to confirm:
>
> 1. Make sure that all systems are up to the latest service packs because
> there was a DFS performance issue in your previous post which had been
> resolved by hotfix in SP2 for Windows 2000.
>
> 2. In my last reply I have checked userenv.log file and Win2k3's Network
> MPSReport and given the related suggestions on them. However, after I
> checked the Win2k's MPSReport today, I found it is a non-ENG version, we
> will provide a best effort on this issue and you may need to seek
> assistance from local product support team so that you can get the most
> efficient support on it.
>
> I suggest you contact the local PSS or newsgroup. Currently we offer
> Partner newsgroups in the following languages:
>
> English - http://members.microsoft.com/partner/newsgroups/default.aspx
> Simplified Chinese - : http://www.mspartnersupport.com Traditional
> Chinese
> - http://www.microsoft.com/taiwan/community
> Japanese
> -http://communities.microsoft.com/newsgroups/default.asp?ICP=JPN_DA&sLCID=jp
> German
> -http://communities.microsoft.com/newsgroups/default.asp?icp=Germany_PSS_VAP
> &slcid=de
> Spanish - visit
> http://www.microsoft.com/spain/partner/soporte/gruposnoticias/default.asp
> for instructions to access Spanish partner newsgroups Portuguese -
> http://www.microsoft.com/brasil/parceiros/sup/for/default.aspx for
> instructions to access Portuguese partner newsgroups Greek -
> http://www.microsoft.com/hellas/partner/default.asp for instructions to
> access Greek partner newsgroups.
>
> If you are posting in a language that is not listed here, please visit
> www.microsoft.com/partner and click on the Worldwide Sites link to find
> the
> appropriate resources for your language.
>
> Thanks for your understanding.
>
> Thanks & Regards
>
> Amanda Wang [MSFT]
>
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
>
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
>
> ====================================================================
>
> When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
> that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
>
> =====================================================================
>
> --------------------
>>X-Tomcat-ID: 245765645
>>References: <7C9E0C9C-D9DA-4D57-B9CF-AED3E4DC28E1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <OJ0BRIqYFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <rXCSomcZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <eSMob8eZFHA.584@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <eEuVRqoZFHA.2996@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <R#5uTOpZFHA.2184@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <ycK8FypZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <#ESZc8AcFHA.3912@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <tfMrfqZcFHA.3052@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>Content-Type: text/plain
>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>From: v-amanwa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Amanda Wang [MSFT])
>>Organization: Microsoft
>>Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 14:50:00 GMT
>>Subject: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
>>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>Message-ID: <4yMivKocFHA.1264@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>Lines: 396
>>Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
>>Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
> microsoft.public.windows.server.networking:16672
>>NNTP-Posting-Host: TOMCATIMPORT1 10.201.218.122
>>
>>Hello,
>>
>>Thanks for your effort on this issue.
>>
>>I have checked the MPSReports and userenv.log file. Then I would provide
>>the results I have found separately as following:
>>
>>I. In userenv.log file, I found the error as following:
>>
>>USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:29:812 MyRegUnLoadKey: Failed to unmount hive
>>00000005
>>USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:29:822 DumpOpenRegistryHandle: 2 user registry
>>Handles leaked from
>>\Registry\User\S-1-5-21-923867646-1928005521-2076119496-1018
>>USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:29:832 UnloadUserProfileP: Didn't unload user
>>profile <err = 5>
>>USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:30:422 UnloadUserProfile: UnloadUserProfileP failed
>>with 0
>>USERENV(22c.230) 10:44:09:412 CUserProfile::CleanupUserProfile: Ref Count
>>is not 0
>>USERENV(22c.230) 10:44:09:412 CUserProfile::CleanupUserProfile: Ref Count
>>is not 0
>>USERENV(22c.230) 10:44:09:412 CUserProfile::CleanupUserProfile: Ref Count
>>is not 0
>>USERENV(22c.230) 10:46:44:876 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx
> failed
>>for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332
>>USERENV(26c.2d0) 10:46:44:996 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx
> failed
>>for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332
>>USERENV(26c.2d0) 10:46:45:006 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx
> failed
>>for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332
>>USERENV(22c.230) 10:46:46:348 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx
> failed
>>for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332
>>
>>***According to these errors, it appears that the client cannot get the
> DNS.
>>
>>
>>II. In Win2k3's Network MPSReport, found the errors as following:
>>
>>Doing initial required tests
>>
>> Testing server: Verkstadsgatan\VERKTYG
>> Starting test: Connectivity
>> * Active Directory LDAP Services Check
>> * Active Directory RPC Services Check
>> [VERKTYG] DsBindWithSpnEx() failed with error 1753,
>> Win32 Error 1753.
>> Printing RPC Extended Error Info:
>> Error Record 1, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
>> System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
>> Generating component is 2 (RPC runtime)
>> Status is 1753: There are no more endpoints available from the
>>endpoint mapper.
>> Detection location is 500
>> NumberOfParameters is 4
>> Unicode string: ncacn_ip_tcp
>> Unicode string:
>>ee5d8aed-846c-43c6-984c-9051a63a0fc9._msdcs.smedjan.local
>> Long val: -481213899
>> Long val: 65537
>> Error Record 2, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
>> System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
>> Generating component is 2 (RPC runtime)
>> Status is 1722: The RPC server is unavailable.
>> Detection location is 761
>> NumberOfParameters is 1
>> Unicode string: 1025
>> Error Record 3, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
>> System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
>> Generating component is 8 (winsock)
>> Status is 1722: The RPC server is unavailable.
>> Detection location is 313
>> Error Record 4, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
>> System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
>> Generating component is 8 (winsock)
>> Status is 10048: Only one usage of each socket address
>>(protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted.
>> Detection location is 311
>> NumberOfParameters is 3
>> Long val: 1025
>> Pointer val: 0
>> Pointer val: 0
>> Error Record 5, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
>> System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
>> Generating component is 8 (winsock)
>> Status is 10048: Only one usage of each socket address
>>(protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted.
>> Detection location is 318
>> ......................... VERKTYG failed test Connectivity
>>
>>***The error point to the RPC server is unavailable and there are no more
>>endpoints available from the endpoint mapper.
>>
>>
>>Therefore, according to the above errors, we can confirm the issue should
>>be a DNS replication issue. There are many reasons can cause the issue:
>>
>>1. Please refer to the following articles to configure an Authoritative
>>Time Server first:
>>
>>216734 How to Configure an Authoritative Time Server in Windows 2000
>>http://support.microsoft.com/?id=216734
>>
>>314054 How to Configure an Authoritative Time Server in Windows XP
>>http://support.microsoft.com/?id=314054
>>
>>816042 How to configure the Windows Time service on a Windows Server
>>2003-based http://support.microsoft.com/?id=816042
>>
>>2. Please check the configuration of two sites and refer to the following
>>articles:
>>
>>Windows Server 2003 Active Directory Branch Office Guide
>>
>>http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=9353a4f6-a8a8-40bb
> -
>>9fa7-3a95c9540112&displaylang=en
>>
>>Deploying Active Directory for Branch Office Environments
>>
>>http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/windows2000serv/technologies/activ
> e
>>directory/deploy/adguide/addeploy/default.mspx
>>
>>Active Directory Branch Office Planning Guide
>>
>>http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/techinfo/planning/activedirectory/bran
> c
>>hoffice/default.asp
>>
>>Please pay more attention to the following contents in these articles:
>>
>>Configuring Automated Site Coverage
>>Another situation that requires configuration of SRV resource records
>>results from not having a domain controller in a particular site. This
>>might happen because there are no users who require constant logon access,
>>or because replication to the site might be too expensive or too slow. To
>>ensure that a domain controller is located in the site closest to a client
>>computer, if not the same site, Windows Server?2003 automatically attempts
>>to register a domain controller in every site by using an automated site
>>coverage algorithm. The algorithm determines how one site can "cover" a
>>second site when no domain controller exists in the second site. By
>>default, the process uses the replication topology.
>>The algorithm works as follows: each domain controller checks all sites in
>>the forest and then checks the replication cost matrix. A domain
> controller
>>advertises itself (registers a site-related SRV record in DNS) in any site
>>that does not have a domain controller for that domain and for which its
>>site has the lowest-cost connections. This process ensures that every site
>>has a domain controller even though its domain controller might not be
>>physically located in that site. The domain controllers that are published
>>in DNS are those from the closest site (as defined by the replication
>>topology).
>>In a branch office environment, automated site coverage should be
> disabled.
>>Figure 4.9 shows where this process fits into the overall DNS planning
>>process.
>>Figure 4.9 Configuring Automated Site Coverage
>>
>>In the branch office scenario, computers should not locate domain
>>controllers in any other branch office. A client should always communicate
>>with a local domain controller, and if that is not available, use a domain
>>controller in the data center site. Automated site coverage makes it
>>possible for a situation to occur where a client might be able to locate a
>>domain controller in another branch office. For this reason, automated
> site
>>coverage should be disabled in a branch office environment. Use the Group
>>Policy snap-in to achieve this:
>>1. Disable the "Automated Site Coverage by DC Locator DNS SRV Records"
>>Group Policy on all domain controllers, not only in the branches but also
>>in the data center. You can do this by modifying the Default Domain
>>Controllers Group Policy.
>>2. Do not register generic records, as described in "Finding a Domain
>>Controller in the Data Center" earlier in this chapter.
>>If both of these configurations are performed, then all clients within a
>>branch office site will discover the local domain controller if it is
>>available or the data center domain controller if no local domain
>>controller is available.
>>When a site with a domain controller for some domain is closer to another
>>site than to the data center site, the administrator has the ability to
>>configure that domain controller with the specific ("close") sites to be
>>covered using the following Group Policy settings:
>>" Sites Covered by the DC Locator DNS SRV Records
>>" Sites Covered by the GC Locator DNS SRV Records
>>" Sites Covered by the Application Directory Partition Locator DNS SRV
>>Records
>>However, physical proximity or network performance are not the only
>>criteria. If firewalls or dial-on-demand lines do not allow traffic in
> this
>>direction, incorrectly applied site coverage will be bad for clients
>>because they will fall back to an unreachable domain controller and not to
>>the data center.
>>
>>HTH! And I will continue checking the MPSReports to see if there are any
>>other clues I can found. If you have anything update, please feel free to
>>let me know. I'm looking forward to your reply.
>>
>>Thanks & Regards
>>
>>Amanda Wang [MSFT]
>>
>>Microsoft Online Partner Support
>>
>>Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
>>
>>====================================================================
>>
>>When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
>>that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
>>
>>=====================================================================
>>
>>--------------------
>>>X-Tomcat-ID: 233018892
>>>References: <7C9E0C9C-D9DA-4D57-B9CF-AED3E4DC28E1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>><OJ0BRIqYFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>><rXCSomcZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>><eSMob8eZFHA.584@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>><eEuVRqoZFHA.2996@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>><R#5uTOpZFHA.2184@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>><ycK8FypZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>><#ESZc8AcFHA.3912@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>>Content-Type: text/plain
>>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>>From: v-amanwa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Amanda Wang [MSFT])
>>>Organization: Microsoft
>>>Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 11:08:53 GMT
>>>Subject: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
>>>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>>Message-ID: <tfMrfqZcFHA.3052@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>>Lines: 131
>>>Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
>>>Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
>>microsoft.public.windows.server.networking:16613
>>>NNTP-Posting-Host: tomcatimport2.phx.gbl 10.201.218.182
>>>
>>>Hello,
>>>
>>>Thanks for your response.
>>>
>>>First, I would like give a summary of this issue including setup
>>>environment, main issue you encountered and the actions we have
>>>performed.
>>>
>>>Setup environment:
>>>============
>>>A Windows 2000 server was at first installed in site A (both
>>geographically
>>>and in the site configuration) this is acting as the "primary" domain
>>>controller.
>>>This server is GC, DDNS, DHCP, WINS, Print and file server.
>>>
>>>Then at site B there is a windows 2003 server. This is acting as a GC,
>>>DDNS,
>>>WINS, file and print server.
>>>
>>>The sites are connected through a VPN tunnel with cisco pix firewalls.
> The
>>>internet connection is at site A a dedicated connection and at site B a
>>>ADSL 1Mbit connection.
>>>
>>>Issue:
>>>==============
>>>When the connection between the two sites is terminated, the clients at
>>>site B becomes extremely slow to logon and even to access the local
> server
>>>at site B.
>>>
>>>Actions:
>>>====================
>>>1. Yes every client in Site B is suffering from this
>>>2. The DNS is replicated through sites and services
>>>3. The DNS settings on site B is distributed the following way to the
>>>clients: (the DHCP scope settings)
>>>Primary dns: site Bs win2k3 server
>>>Secondary dns: site As win2k server
>>>Same setup for wins...
>>>4. The mappings on the clients are mapped like this:
>>>NET USE G: \\smedjan.local\DFSroot\Verktyg_Gemensam /PERSISTENT:NO
>>>If change it to NET USE G: \\verktyg\Verktyg_Gemensam$ /PERSISTENT:NO
>>>then the problem with slow connections disappears.
>>>\\smedjan.local is the domain name and verktyg is the file server's name.
>>>a, the file server is Server B in site B
>>>b, If don't map the shares there is no problem
>>>
>>>5. If change the group policy setting on the w2k3 server at site B the
>>>policy won't be applied to the clients until the w2k server at site A has
>>>that group policy information. Even if run GPUPDATE on the clients and
>>>server.
>>>If make a change in the policies on w2k server at site A the clients gets
>>>that policy applied directly with GPUPDATE.
>>>
>>>Now from the above conclusion, we can find the issue should have two
>>>aspects:
>>>
>>>1. It seems that Site B's clients cannot authenticate by Win2k3 server.
>>It
>>>may be caused by DNS replication.
>>>2. It may be caused by the mappings and it looks like a DFSroot issue
>>>
>>>Therefore, we can perform the following steps to isolate the issue:
>>>1. Terminate the connection between site A and B
>>>2. Boot one client computer by using safe mode with network
>>>3. Don't map the shares and check if the slow logon issue still persists
>>on
>>>this client.
>>>4. How long will it take in logging on?
>>>This test will help us isolate if the issue is caused by replication
>>>between A and B or by DFSroot.
>>>
>>>The issue is complex and Network MPSReport and Userenv log on files are
>>>very important for us to perform further research on it.
>>>
>>>I don't know why I haven't received your E-mail last time. Would you
>>>please use two different E-mail accounts to send the information I
>>>requested to me at v-amanwa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx? You effort on this issue
> would
>>>be appreciated and I'm looking forward to hearing from you.
>>>
>>>Thanks & Regards
>>>
>>>Amanda Wang [MSFT]
>>>
>>>Microsoft Online Partner Support
>>>
>>>Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
>>>
>>>====================================================================
>>>
>>>When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
>>>that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
>>>
>>>=====================================================================
>>>
>>>--------------------
>>>>From: <fc9a9f82-2129692850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>References: <7C9E0C9C-D9DA-4D57-B9CF-AED3E4DC28E1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><OJ0BRIqYFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><rXCSomcZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><eSMob8eZFHA.584@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><eEuVRqoZFHA.2996@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><R#5uTOpZFHA.2184@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><ycK8FypZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>Subject: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
>>>>Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 13:57:41 +0200
>>>>Lines: 19
>>>>X-Priority: 3
>>>>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>>>>X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
>>>>X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
>>>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
>>>>Message-ID: <#ESZc8AcFHA.3912@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>>>NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.wermtec.se 194.132.162.3
>>>>Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl
>>>>Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
>>>microsoft.public.windows.server.networking:16505
>>>>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>>>
>>>>I will try to mail you the previously discussed files again.
>>>>
>>>>1. The Site B has server B in that site and Site A has server A in its
>>>site.
>>>>Do you want me to pu both of the servers in site A?
>>>>
>>>>2. \\smedjan.local is the domain name and verktyg is the file servers
>>name.
>>>>a, the file server is Server B in site B
>>>>b, If I dont map the shares theere is no problem, so the mapping is a
>>>>problem, or to find the right way to map drives seems to be a problem...
>>>>
>>>>3. I will get you a report next time I go to my customer wich I hope can
>>>be
>>>>this week.
>>>>
>>>>Best Regards
>>>>Perra
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- From: Amanda Wang [MSFT]
- Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- References:
- Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- From: fc9a9f82-2129692850
- Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- From: Amanda Wang [MSFT]
- Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- From: Amanda Wang [MSFT]
- Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- From: fc9a9f82-2129692850
- Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- From: Amanda Wang [MSFT]
- Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- From: Amanda Wang [MSFT]
- Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- From: Amanda Wang [MSFT]
- Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- Prev by Date: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- Next by Date: Re: Adding another server?
- Previous by thread: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- Next by thread: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|