Ah, okay, in that situation it would be better, although I was referring
more to X performance than overall user experience. That was the same
reason we were willing to live with such a solution for awhile...we didn't
have enough recent hardware to run Sun Ray on Solaris, so we just used an
ancient UltraSPARC-II box and had users XDMCP over to a more modern box
which was shared with an LTSP solution.
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Jason Winningham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 11:56 AM
To: "SunRay-Users mailing list" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] SunRay-Server not for login
On Aug 14, 2008, at 9:18 AM, William Yang wrote:
That being said, the performance will definitely be worse.
I guess that depends on the situation, because I just came back from a
test in my largest sunray lab (30 stations) and found performance more
than acceptable.
We have a T1000 as a sunray server (poor choice for an interactive
system, but that mistake was all mine). I fire up 30 remote sessions
with 30 different users to a quad 2.4GHz CentOS box, and found that
desktop performance was _better_ than JDS on the T1000 (a direct sunray
login). The CentOS box and the T1000 are connected via a gigabit
ethernet which is shared among my server farm and used for NFS and other
server-to-server traffic (but not sunray or general IP traffic).
-Jason
----------------------------------------
Jason Winningham
Computer Systems Engineer
College of Engineering
The University of Alabama in Huntsville
http://support.eng.uah.edu/ http://www.eng.uah.edu/~jdw
_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
