Ignore David's answer please it is only going to make your ISP rich selling you a connection you don't need.
1. MS terminal services will always run better on asymmetrical DSL at the remote end, preferably 8000/368 as allowed by Telstra since Dec06 on most exchanges. I have a client who went from 1500/256 in Dec last year to 8000/368. (note the TS srv end has 18000/1000 ADSL2 with no contention ratio) They have increased from 4-7 TS sessions to about 12-15 sessions and they all run faster since the speed upgrade and they have headroom to add more sessions. Why ? Because all that gets uploaded are the remote mouse clicks and keyboard strokes but the screen refreshes then have to come back down. .. Gee what would be larger... Limiting screen colour depths can help but basically there are a heap of settings that need to be tweaked on a Terminal server to get it performing correctly. Maybe your techie can advise. 2. Possibly issues with Profile but unlikely. I haven't played with it for a while but 6 months ago the newer version was running a lot quicker and using less ram. When did you last do a backup and restore as this effectively compacts the Interbase db's. How much ram is in your TS server ? how many cpu's of what speed ? how many ts sessions per server ? What AV are you running on the servers ? What connection do you have at the primary site ? ADSL2 ? What server is running your AD ? What else is running on the Profile server ? You will need at least dual P4's and 4 gig of ram for 10-18 sessions per server. Raid 1 or 5 and gigabit nics to the DB server on their own managed switch. They are all tier 1 servers (HP,IBM,Dell etc) aren't they not clone toys ? Profile does tend to use a fair bit of ram in a TS session, 50-100 mb per user. The DB server would need at least 2 gig of ram, more if your db's are getting big. Not sure if the Interbase version you are running supports dual cpu's or not. 18 months ago dual cpu's actually slowed the old version of interbase down !!! Sorry got carried away :) Andrew.C -----Original Message----- From: Duncan Guy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 18 June 2007 4:42 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; General Practice Computing Group Talk Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] virtual servers we are running Profile on Interbase, we have one server which is for the database, now 2 servers that are dishing out the TS connections and running Profile application. this is where the slow bit is. The site where the servers sit are connecting directly to the database server, running profile as an app on their workstations. we have another server that does our intranet and houses the ecg/stress test databse, another for running the back office financial software, one that does a PACs type role and our oldest server is essentially mine and it runs MSSQL and I have the latest version of Profile on it to test it for a month or two before letting it loose on the troops it is slower currently at TS remote sites, but still sluggish at primary site, and the TS server has high resource usage, Duncan Andrew wrote: > I thought Duncan was running Profile, and therefore not using MSSQL but > Interbase ? > > Is it slow at the primary site as well as the remote sites ? > > > > Andrew.C > > > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Peter Machell > *Sent:* Saturday, 16 June 2007 9:22 PM > *To:* General Practice Computing Group Talk > *Subject:* Re: [GPCG_TALK] virtual servers > > > > On 16/06/2007, at 8:09 AM, Duncan Guy wrote: > > > > We have over 40 Drs, 7 sites all relying on an inhouse EMR. > > > > Our IT guru threw another server at the situation and using Microsoft > load balancing slowed it all down even further, > > > > In total we have 7 servers doing different jobs, would be good to get > them all working on the same team or outsource it totally, > > > > Duncan, I agree with Tim that you should get a proven professional > opinion. I assume all your clients are TS so you don't have a client / > server bottleneck, that your "guru" has half a brain and is throwing > fibre channel at your server network and everything he can at your > I/O, I'd say you have hit the limits of what MSSQL can do. > > > > Perhaps it's time to investigate Oracle on Unix, although I'd hate to > imagine what you've already paid Bill. > > > > Find yourself a really good DBA. You could probably justify a half-time > job for one. > > > > cheers, > > Peter. > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Gpcg_talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
