Re: Terminal Server Performance

No we havent sniffed or analyzed the network traffic. Like I said I know
they have network issues because they still have static ips, there is no
segments in the network, etc. What tool would you recommend to analyze the
traffic? What do you mean by the link saturated? We havent looked at the
queue yet during peak period...just the reads/writes. What would the queue
indicate?...We are using RAID1 mirroring...Grecko

"Jeff Pitsch" wrote:

100 users does equal a lot fo traffic. Have you sniffed or analyzed the
network traffic? is the link saturated? Have you looked at the queue for
the hard drives to see if commands are lining up during peak periods? What
RAID config are you using?

Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Services


"Grecko" <Grecko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:55B7AA77-B11B-48AA-A66D-B060F6D2808E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
There is a lot of memory still available on the server when the
performance
is slow and no spikes in the processor. The only thing that indicates a
problem is the high read/writes in the perfmon. Our application people
our
telling us that the bottle neck is in the network and that the read/writes
shouldnt have an effect on performance. Of course, we are seeing the
opposite
of this. I am new to the environment and just trying to help each side.
It
seems that it may be a little of both network and hard-drive read/writes
as
best as I can tell. Any ideas?...Grecko

"Jeff Pitsch" wrote:

I'm not sure how network would affect read/writes to the HD of the
server.
The only way it could, that I can think of off hand, is if the network
card
was bad and causing an unusual amount of interrupts forcing the processor
to
work harder and forcing more read/writes as the cpu is backed up more and
more. What does the queue show for requests waiting to the hard drives?
Is
CPU being spiked at all? How much memory is available on the servers
when
this is happening?

Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Services


"Grecko" <Grecko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:C6ECF95E-4FA8-4034-889E-D1C2E28DCB6D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
We havent tried anything yet. Yes, we are probably going to add
another
server to offload some of the users. We didnt want to do this until we
had
figured out whats causing the problems.....network, hard-drive,
etc...Grecko

"Jeff Pitsch" wrote:

Page files should also be min/max the same so windows is not
growing/shrinking dynamically. this can add alot of overhead. Adding
more
pagefile space would just worsen the situation.

both Vera and I have mentioned this but have you seriously considered
that
you may have simply maxed out the server? Have you tried virtual
memory
products from companies such as ThinPrint, RTO Soft, Provision
Networks
(I'm
an employee)? Those would cut down on your paging drasticallyl if
there
are
savings to be had.

Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Services


"Grecko" <Grecko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6E96045F-ACCE-4752-8113-2F175A1FF2A7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I checked the page file and its setup on drive C: for 400 to 1000
MB,
on
drive F: for 12286 - 13386, drive H is a system managed drive, and
driveE
has
no paging file. Should we make the amount lower on C:. I am
assuming
it
wont
roll to F until it uses the all page file on C:? Of course if this
is
the
case, then we would have a bottle neck on the C: drive. What would
be
the
best way to distribute the calls to the drives?...Gregg

"Vera Noest [MVP]" wrote:

It's impossible to say here why the server is having performance
problems (but 100 concurrent sessions is quite a lot, depemding of
course on which applications the users are running).

You'll have to use Performance monitor to find out what the
bottleneck is. Since you have noticed high RW activity on the
drive,
check the size and location of your swap file.
You can find some tools and guidelines here:
http://ts.veranoest.net/ts_performance.htm
_________________________________________________________
Vera Noest
MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

=?Utf-8?B?R3JlY2tv?= <Grecko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on
03 jul 2008 in microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

We are having poor performance on our terminal server. We only
have about 100 users on one server with 2 processors and 8 gigs
of ram. The poor performance seems to coincide with high/read
writes on our C: drive. Could the drive itself be the
bottleneck or the network itself?...Thanks...Grecko










.

Relevant Pages

  • RE: net use
    ... The network connection could not be found. ... mapped drives to properly register in T.S.. ... AD/Exchange Server) are fine. ... When you run the logon script manually, you receive "system error 85" error ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services)
  • Re: Terminal Server Performance
    ... it appears that the bottleneck is with the ... I will have to analyze the data when the server starts going slow again. ... percentage in the network utilization?... ... the hard drives to see if commands are lining up during peak ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services)
  • Re: Vista drive mapping to 2008 Server
    ... the server encountered a network ... "Kerry Brown" wrote: ... connect or map drives. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.networking_sharing)
  • Re: Terminal Server Performance
    ... I will have to look at the disk queue on Monday. ... We are using switches and the server has a 1 gbps card in it connecting it ... for the percentage in the network utilization?... ... "Jeff Pitsch" wrote: ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services)
  • Re: Terminal Server Performance
    ... when we are having problems and it seems the network is fine during the ... I will have to analyze the data when the server starts going slow again. ... "Jeff Pitsch" wrote: ... the hard drives to see if commands are lining up during peak ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services)