Re: terminal server on VMware
- From: "Peter Lawton" <devnull@fakedomain>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 06:11:06 +0100
Yes, installing app can sometimes be a bother on x64. Although only one of
our apps won't run on x64 yet due to some 16bit code, there were two or
three I couldn't install with the application installer.
I had to copy the files and registry entries off a 32 bit server by hand,
then register some .dll and .ocx files maually.
Interestingly I found that I couldn't manually register the DDLs if I put
them in windows\system32, but I could if I put them in a sub directory of
program files (x86)
Peter Lawton
"VirtualTMAC" <timothymcfadden@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1152500008.555266.168200@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I agree you should test and test again. The print driver issues are
solved in many of the same ways we solved the 32-bit print driver
issues. Thinprint, Citrix,.. As for apps I was surprised how well
*most* apps worked without any issues.. Most apps that gave us
problems were apps that were developed or customized "in house". Also
there were some Commercial apps that didn't work right out of the gate.
We had to re-package a few because the installer didn't like 64-bit.
Also we had to go back to the vendor for a few. Surprisingly the
vendors were very responsive and had 64-bit fixed available upon
request.
TMAC
Jeff Pitsch wrote:
And I would agree but again, it depends on your constraints. It is also
good to have an idea of what 64-bit does and does not deliver. I know
for a
fact that many people have been unable to use the PS4 UPD in their
environment because it has been very buggy for them. As well if your CPU
constrained or disk constrained, 64-bit will not buy you much at all
unless
you can alleviate those somehow. It's hard sticking more processors in a
dual proc box if both slots are already filled. :)
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
My whole point was that a solution that works for one does not
necessarily
means it will work for everyone. Any solution needs to be tested and
verified first before full implementation. I've worked with a couple of
customers that have moved to 64-bit without realizing the consequences of
doing so.
"Peter Lawton" <devnull@fakedomain> wrote in message
news:%232dhaw1oGHA.4268@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
We've just moved from 32bit Citrix PS4 servers to 64bit and have found
we
can get more than twice the number of users comfortably, with better
performance, on the new x64 servers than the old x32 servers. The
server
hardware is the same (HP DL585) but with more RAM.
Fortunately with Citrix PS4 printer drivers aren't an issue when the
network printers are connected from the client PC, the terminal server
just uses the generic Citrix x64 driver combined with the 32bit driver
on
the client.
We were also lucky that only one of our legacy apps won't run under
x64,
so we run that as a seamless published app to the x64 servers from a
very
small 32bit Citrix server.
Altogether I've been very impressed by how much better x64 terminal
servers are than 32bit, at least in our environment, faster, more users
and more stable, but YMMV.
Peter lawton
"Jeff Pitsch" <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:uVeAgwkoGHA.4152@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Keep in mind there are limitations to 64-bit. Mainly driver support
(including printer drivers). Memory requirements for 32-bit apps as
well
(1.3 - 1.7 x the normal amount of memory) and others. 64-bit is fine
but
you must take everything into consideration and figure out if it is
really what you need. If you aren't kernel constrained then 64-bit
may
not be what you need. How many users? what applications? what are
your
bottlenecks? etc. I would definately not blindly move to 64-bit until
you have business reasons to do so.
And who listens to Ron anyway? lol, j/k Ron :)
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
"VirtualTMAC" <timothymcfadden@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1152313181.452127.37590@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I have been going through this dilemma myself.. I talked to some
experts from rapid app (they are the number one Citrix and Vmware
consulting firm) and they told me that vmware is not the way to go
right now. When the hypervisor support is built in to vmware then it
will be a great option. You best option right now would be to buy a
couple of Dual Core, AMD DL385 or DL585 boxes with 16gb of RAM
Windows
2003 server 64-bit. There is a huge performance improvement with
64-bit and I was to my surprise able to get all 60 of our 32-bit apps
running on 64-bit without a problem. You will want to get a couple
of
server and load balance them so that if you want to take one out of
service for maintenance you can. That is why I chose the 385s.
Here is another resource that gets into detail on this.
Interview with Ron Oglesby on Citrix, VMware, and mixing them
together
http://www.brianmadden.com/content/content.asp?ID=579
TMAC
marinus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi,
what to do.
Several (proliant) servers in a TS farm. Session directory on one of
them
or
HP ml570 (?) = very big machine with 4 CPU's and 10 GB memm and
then
install several VM server to create the TS-farm.
What is the best option to create a stable and fast Terminal Server
envirement that is easy to controll.
regards
Marinus
.
- References:
- terminal server on VMware
- From: marinus
- Re: terminal server on VMware
- From: VirtualTMAC
- Re: terminal server on VMware
- From: Jeff Pitsch
- Re: terminal server on VMware
- From: Peter Lawton
- Re: terminal server on VMware
- From: Jeff Pitsch
- Re: terminal server on VMware
- From: VirtualTMAC
- terminal server on VMware
- Prev by Date: Intermittent Error using RDC
- Next by Date: Re: Lockdown user seessions
- Previous by thread: Re: terminal server on VMware
- Next by thread: Re: terminal server on VMware
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
