Wasnt there even mentioning that it isnt the case anymore with 2012, meaning it was before? :)
Ive tested branchcache as part of a project to death and it wasnt really good in Server 2008, like this: First ever dl with BC enabled, first client downloads, server creates cash, first time (not pre-created), client DOES NOT put it into the BC cache, only CM cash. 2nd client downloads, doesnt use first client, it is NOT in that cash, 2nd client gets the cache 3rd client finally was able to use client 2, not the first. Server reboot, almost the same repeats. I saw that when I tested that over and over. So, with 2008 it wasnt really useful. -R From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld Sent: Freitag, 5. Dezember 2014 14:06 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck Thats what surprises me though, as I wrote a tool to fix that issue and then there was no issue. So maybe we need to revamp that if people are still using 2008 R2. Its definitely not the case on 2012, thats for sure. From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Phil Wilcock Sent: den 5 december 2014 11:28 To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck Oh, interesting debate guys! Love it. The fact is I agree with some or all of both arguments (I should work for the UN) BranchCache has a bad rep, the docs from MS dont help, but the picture is improving, and will continue to do so. BITS is, in my opinion, the piece that needs more work. BranchCache is after all an API that pretty much does a great job of Peer Caching if its used correctly, and has improved greatly even between Windows 8-8.1. BITS needs a kick in the ass in terms of the way SCCM uses it but remember that BITS is used by over 600Million desktops every day so its not going away either. There are some enhancements coming that will make the BITS/BranchCache/SCCM story a lot more attractive. And yeah Im pretty sure that BranchCache hashes are lost on Server 2008 reboots hey, there should be an app for that right Andreas? ;-) Cheers Phil From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld Sent: 05 December 2014 09:41 To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck Too little, sleep all confused BranchCache wasnt even in 2008, so it has to be R2. But pretty sure that was tested, anyhow will give it a kick and get back to you. //A From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld Sent: den 5 december 2014 08:19 To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck Really? I think we tested that, but it could have been 2008 R2, will check 2008 and update if that its the case. Good find! //Andreas From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Roland Janus Sent: den 5 december 2014 00:21 To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck How about a comment on this from your site: Are Hashes Lost If The Server Reboots? Thats a lie, floating around on some websites, hashes are kept over reboots. So you can reboot as much as you like. Thats exactly what I saw on Server 2008. Every reboot and it had to download again. It does happen. On Server 2008. -R From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld Sent: Donnerstag, 4. Dezember 2014 23:27 To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck Yeah, that old chestnut! Not only does that whitepaper have a lot of misconceptions/confusion on how BranchCache works, with the upcoming BranchCache for OSD pretty much all of those arguments fall. And then we havent even covered the points where BranchCache kick butts! :) Once we got BranchCache for OSD 1.0 out the door we will make an updated whitepaper. And yeah, did I mention its free? :) //Andreas From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Troy Martin Sent: den 4 december 2014 22:59 To: <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck If you're seriously considering BranchCache as the alternate content provider for your organization, be sure to do your homework, by first reading a white paper Paul Thomsen has written: <http://www.1e.com/blog/all_resources/branchcache-right-organisation/> http://www.1e.com/blog/all_resources/branchcache-right-organisation/ In the white paper, we look at the key reasons why BranchCache is not suitable for SCCM content distribution and examine why the expectation that BranchCache could be appropriate for SCCM content distribution should be questioned and compared to alternatives before deploying in your organization. The paper also reviews how BranchCache works, how it has changed over the years, and where to learn more. So while BranchCache "works", the bigger question is whether it's right for your organization's needs. Again, do your homework first... Sent from my iPhone On Dec 4, 2014, at 8:53 AM, Andreas Hammarskjöld < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> wrote: Even better, use BranchCache since its free and works great? //Andreas From: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Magnus Tveten Sent: den 4 december 2014 04:03 To: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck AdaptivaOnesite is really good to... the way it uses the network without interfering with anything. We used that to push Win7 Image (+ all the needed software packages) to machines at all the different sites with very small links and not once did anyone from the business find the network slow.. _____ MAGNUS TVETEN SERVER SUPPORT ENGINEER CO CITRIX/SERVER Insurance Australia Group Limited Lvl 1, 23 Lakeside Drive, Burwood Burwood East VIC 3151 Australia T +61 3 8804 3226 M +61 411 010 460 E <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <http://www.iag.com.au> www.iag.com.au PLEASE CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING THIS EMAIL. _____ From: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Marable, Mike Sent: Thursday, 4 December 2014 12:02 PM To: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck Perhaps, something like NomadBranch? ;) From: 'Michael Mott' < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> Reply-To: " <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]" < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> Date: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 at 6:00 PM To: " <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]" < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> Subject: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck Use a product that invokes the ACP. From: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Schwan, Phil Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 2:46 PM To: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] Subject: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck No. Once you make it a Pull DP, it essentially becomes a sort of slaved client and uses BITS for the transfers. DistMgr wont move on to other packages until the PkgXferMgr reports back that the one its working on is done, so one very large package like this can tie everything up. Heres a paraphrase from Todd about how the Pull DP is supposed to work: - Pull content from source DP and do the processing of the content locally - DistMgr creates a snapshot and calculates the HASH - PkgXferMgr sends a package info bundle (XML inside of .tar) to the PullDP - PullDP opens the XML and gets a list of content from the DPLocation DPUrl - PullDP component on the DP checks to see how many of the files are already loaded - PullDP component passes list of files to DTS - DTS creates BITS download job - CCMEXEC gets the files form BITS download location and writes them to disk - SMSDPProv imports the content into the Content Library - PullDP creates status messages and sends to Site Server However, you can end up encountering issues with large packages timing out, refreshes causing the already copied files to be deleted (meaning the whole thing starts over), and so on. Among his (supported) recommendations were increasing the DistMgr thread limit, increasing the query interval and timeout values, and making sure youre at R2CU3 (some of the issues have been fixed over the course of the last few CUs). Hope that helps! -Phil _________________________________________________________________ Phil Schwan | Technical Architect, Enterprise Windows Services Microsoft VTSP ( <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]) Project Leadership Associates|2000 Town Center, Suite 1900, Southfield, MI 48075 Lync: 312.756.1626 Mobile: 419.262.5133 <http://www.projectleadership.net/> www.projectleadership.net <http://www.linkedin.com/in/philschwan> <image001.jpg> <https://twitter.com/philschwan> <image002.jpg> <http://myitforum.com/myitforumwp/author/philschwan> <image003.jpg> Lead with Strategy. Leverage Technology. Deliver Results. From: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gilmanov, Nile Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 5:16 PM To: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] Subject: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck Funny this is After I turned it into a PULL DP, the Schedule tab disappeared aint that great? Guess have to reverse the changes, then back to PULL, unless there is still a hidden way. Nile Gilmanov Systems Administrator Wabash National Corporation <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] | Office: 765.772.2691 | Mobile: 765.414.7402 From: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gilmanov, Nile Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 5:11 PM To: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] Subject: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck Well THANK YOU! I have been checking this thread every 15 minutes! Going to put this to the test right now! Nile Gilmanov Systems Administrator Wabash National Corporation <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] | Office: 765.772.2691 | Mobile: 765.414.7402 From: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Magnus Tveten Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 4:57 PM To: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] Subject: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck Hmmmm I seem to remember one time being told that if a DP (well this was in SCCM2007, so a secondary site) rate limit was not ever at 100% it would only do one package at the time ? So if Im correct (huge chance Im not) then from 7 am to 6pm it woudl only do one pacakge at the time... And we had ours at max of 90% so we always only had one package being processed at a time.. _____ MAGNUS TVETEN SERVER SUPPORT ENGINEER CO CITRIX/SERVER Insurance Australia Group Limited Lvl 1, 23 Lakeside Drive, Burwood Burwood East VIC 3151 Australia T +61 3 8804 3226 M +61 411 010 460 E <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <http://www.iag.com.au> www.iag.com.au PLEASE CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING THIS EMAIL. _____ From: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gilmanov, Nile Sent: Thursday, 4 December 2014 2:12 AM To: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] Subject: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck ConfigMgr 2012 R2 CU2 I believe per: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\SMS\Setup Version REG_SZ 7958 Full Version REG_SZ 5.00.7958.1000 UI Version REG_SZ 7958 Phase REG_DWORD 0x1c7 ReplicationPhase REG_DWORD 0x0 Estimated Number of Clients REG_DWORD 0x0 Server Platforms REG_DWORD 0x20 User REG_SZ Organization REG_SZ Type REG_DWORD 0x1 ReplicationMode REG_DWORD 0x0 Installation Directory REG_SZ e:\Program Files\Microsoft Configuration Manager UI Installation Directory REG_SZ e:\Program Files\Microsoft Configuration Manager\AdminConsole Product ID REG_SZ NONEVAL Provider Location REG_SZ wnclafsccfg01.Wabashnational.lan InstalledSqlExpress REG_DWORD 0x0 External File Directory REG_SZ E:\UpgradetoR2\SetupDL Stop Setup Monitoring REG_DWORD 0x1 CULevel REG_DWORD 0x2 PrerequisiteDir REG_SZ E:\UpgradetoR2\SetupDL IMO irrelevant but since I was there here is my SENDER Properties: Max Concurr. Settings----------------------- All sites: 5 Per site: 3 Retry settings--------- Number of retries: 2 Delay before retrying 1 Nile Gilmanov Systems Administrator Wabash National Corporation <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] | Office: 765.772.2691 | Mobile: 765.414.7402 From: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Schwan, Phil Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 9:56 AM To: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] Subject: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck Paging Mr. Todd Hemsell. Mr. Hemsell, you have a telephone call. :) Nile, what version of ConfigMgr 2012 are you running (SP/CU/etc.)? -Phil From: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gilmanov, Nile Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 9:35 AM To: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] Subject: [mssms] Distribution Bottleneck Was wondering if anyone here understands Distribution better than I as this is really frustrating: Basically I keep running into the same issue, every time I send a large package out it seems to bottle-neck everything else, even little things get stuck waiting for this huge package to complete. My environment is Primary Site, 3-4 DPs that get content directly from PRI, 2 PULL DPs that pull from one of the former DPs. WNCNLSCCMDP01 is a PULL DP, here its full status from the [Distribution Point Configuration Status] view in Monitoring: 12/3/2014 8:52:00 AM Distributing content Distribution Manager instructed Package Transfer manager to send package "LF1001E7" to distribution point "["Display=\\WNCNLSCCMDP01.Cm12rocks.lan\"]MSWNET:["SMS_SITE=LF1"] <file:///\\WNCNLSCCMDP01.Cm12rocks.lan\> \\WNCNLSCCMDP01.Cm12rocks.lan\". In Progress LF1001E7 12/2/2014 3:29:00 PM Processing content on site server Distribution Manager successfully processed package "Workstations_PatchUp_2014" (package ID = LF1001FA). In Progress LF1001FA 12/2/2014 8:05:00 AM Distributing content Distribution Manager instructed Package Transfer manager to send package "LF100167" to distribution point "["Display=\\WNCNLSCCMDP01.Cm12rocks.lan\"]MSWNET:["SMS_SITE=LF1"] <file:///\\WNCNLSCCMDP01.Cm12rocks.lan\> \\WNCNLSCCMDP01.Cm12rocks.lan\". In Progress LF100167 12/3/2014 9:17:00 AM Content is being distributed to the distribution point Package Transfer Manager is currently sending software distribution package LF10021B to distribution point server WNCNLSCCMDP01.CM12ROCKS.LAN, 89 percent of the sending has already completed. In Progress LF10021B 12/3/2014 2:34:00 AM Processing content on site server Distribution Manager successfully processed package "SCEP_Signatures" (package ID = LF1001F7). In Progress LF1001F7 12/2/2014 6:48:00 AM Distributing content Distribution Manager instructed Package Transfer manager to send package "LF1002DB" to distribution point "["Display=\\WNCNLSCCMDP01.Cm12rocks.lan\"]MSWNET:["SMS_SITE=LF1"] <file:///\\WNCNLSCCMDP01.Cm12rocks.lan\> \\WNCNLSCCMDP01.Cm12rocks.lan\". In Progress LF1002DB I can confirm that LF10021B (29 GB in size by the way) is still getting sent to the DP. Per its SMSDPROV.log: [C74][Wed 12/03/2014 08:26:57]:Content '9a596c68-ab09-4869-9c8c-1162d7211f2a' for package 'LF10021B' has been added to content library successfully [C74][Wed 12/03/2014 08:27:00]:Content '1fcd38d1-413f-4b4c-86e1-ecec08966734' for package 'LF10021B' has been added to content library successfully [C74][Wed 12/03/2014 08:27:06]:Content '492b9f3f-e9e8-4a2f-94ec-eb905b7ad4a2' for package 'LF10021B' has been added to content library successfully [DF0][Wed 12/03/2014 08:28:01]:Content 'b3c03b56-886c-46a3-8ea7-ba0a6c90e309' for package 'LF10021B' has been added to content library successfully ONLY LF10021B is being distributed WTH? Here is my settings in the primary site [Software Distribution Component Properties] window: ----Concurrent distribution settings--------------------- Maximum number of packages: 7 Maximum threads per package: 5 ----Retry settings--------------- Number of retries: 100 Delay before retrying: 30 ----Multicast retry settings----------- Number of retries: 3 Delay before retrying: 1 Any ideas guys??? I cant seem to find a good resource online for distribution that addresses multitasking extensively. Thanks, Nile _____ The information transmitted in this message and its attachments (if any) is intended only for the personor entity to which it is addressed.The message may contain confidentialmaterialand /or personal information. Ifyou have received this in error, pleasecontact the sender and delete thise-mail and associated material from any computer. _____ _____ Legal Notice: This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not an intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this email or calling +44(0) 2083269015 (UK) or +1 866 592 4214 (USA). This email and any attachments may be privileged and/or confidential. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or printing of any information it contains is strictly prohibited. The opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of 1E Ltd. Nothing in this email will operate to bind 1E to any order or other contract. ********************************************************** Electronic Mail is not secure, may not be read every day, and should not be used for urgent or sensitive issues _____ The information transmitted in this message and its attachments (if any) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. The message may contain confidential material and /or personal information. If you have received this in error, please contact the sender and delete this e-mail and associated material from any computer. _____ _____ Legal Notice: This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not an intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this email or calling +44(0) 2083269015 (UK) or +1 866 592 4214 (USA). This email and any attachments may be privileged and/or confidential. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or printing of any information it contains is strictly prohibited. The opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of 1E Ltd. Nothing in this email will operate to bind 1E to any order or other contract.
