[Sorry list members: my email gateway prepends the "EXTERNAL" string in the Subject line and I've been forgetting to remove it.]
Devin, I ran utcapture -r on some units including an SDAC and I also saw a constant latency of 500ms, no matter what I was doing in the SDAC. My other physical DTUs had expected #s [< 5ms]. >From my perspective, I would conclude that the 500 # is a bug in the calculation of the latency because I'm not seeing actual performance to mirror that #. Perhaps it's not as responsive as a physical DTU but no way does it correlate to a latency of 500ms. And the fact that it's ALWAYS exactly 500ms makes me suspicious [scratch that: I just saw a few "503" measurements]. I realize this may not help your particular case but it's another datapoint. Scott -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Devin Nate Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 3:35 PM To: SunRay-Users mailing list Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL:Re: EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop AccessClient (SDAC / soft client) poor performance Not yet, I'm going to have to. If I get any sort of resolution, I'll let this list know. Quite honestly, I don't even know if we're on a support contract. We have a few hundred perpetual use licenses, but if I recall those don't include support. Thanks, Devin -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Craig Bender Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 4:30 PM To: SunRay-Users mailing list Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL:Re: EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop AccessClient (SDAC / soft client) poor performance Devin, Have you opened a support call? Devin Nate wrote: > Sorry, that's what we did. We followed the documentation at: > > http://wikis.sun.com/display/SRSS4dot2/Tuning+%28All+Topics%29 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ceri Davies > Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 4:12 PM > To: SunRay-Users mailing list > Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL:Re: EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop AccessClient (SDAC / soft client) poor performance > > Neither of those are correct. The correct syntax is: > > set hires_tick=1 > > Ceri > > On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 04:03:54PM -0700, Devin Nate wrote: >> The first of the 2 options. set highres_tick = 1 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of William Yang >> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 4:01 PM >> To: 'SunRay-Users mailing list' >> Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL:Re: EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop AccessClient (SDAC / soft client) poor performance >> >> Did you do >> set highres_tick = 1 >> or >> set_hires_tick = 1 >> ? >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:sunray-users- >>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Devin Nate >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 5:50 PM >>> To: SunRay-Users mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL:Re: EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop >>> AccessClient (SDAC / soft client) poor performance >>> >>> Ok, I officially give up, and believe it's problems with the SDAC >> software. >>> To answer some inquiries: >>> - with or without uttsc makes no difference, the standard login is >>> also blocky and laggy >>> - kiosk mode on/off >>> - We just spun up a dedicated Solaris 10 u8 box ... no improvement >>> in SDAC, dtu's work perfect. >>> - We put only 1 user on the above >>> - We've tried different client os's - winxp pro 32 bit, win 7 pro 64 >>> bit >>> - 10 / 100 1000 Mbps networking >>> - on solaris, set highres_tick = 1, no difference >>> - Different architectures of processor and video cards >>> - different types of network switching >>> - we have security enabled to the maximum in our SRS environments >>> - basically we've replaced every single component we can to make >>> this work. >>> >>> Basically, SDAC is the only common item which has not performed to the >>> same level of a sun ray DTU or rdp. >>> >>> If/when we re-examine this software, I'll advise this group. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Devin Nate >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:sunray-users- >>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Craig Bender >>> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 9:05 PM >>> To: SunRay-Users mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL:Re: EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop >>> AccessClient (SDAC / soft client) poor performance >>> >>> How is performance not using uttsc? >>> >>> Devin Nate wrote: >>>> Hi Folks, William; >>>> >>>> I've just tried a totally different manchine. My home WinXP Pro 32-bit >>> machine. Yes we'd tried some, but they were IBM/Lenovo, whereas mine has a >>> totally different CPU /Networking /Video /etc. Ping rtt's are small ... >>> performance of SDAC is just as bad. >>> >>> >>>> Ping times attached. Sample utcapture output attached, showing poor perf >>> (the long tokenID is that of SDAC). Second utcapture showing a sun ray >> DTU, >>> with good times. Finally, another ping capture to show that MTU's up to >>> and including 1300 are usable (and the client is set to 1133 for this >>> test). >>>> This is going to kill the project for a few hundred users, and more >>> importantly it's driving me nuts. I suspect either a bug in SDAC or an >>> incompat for SDAC with RHEL. Every other app works great across this >>> network, even the native Sun DTU's work great across this network. >>>> Very frustrating. >>>> >>>> Dare I ask, any more suggestions? >>>> >>>> Is anyone here from the Sun SDAC devel team? If so, maybe we could >>> arrange something? [email protected]. >>>> Thanks, >>>> Devin >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. Ping time RTT. >>>> C:\Documents and Settings\nated>ping 204.12.xx.yy >>>> Pinging 204.12.xx.yy with 32 bytes of data: >>>> Reply from 204.12.xx.yy: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=57 >>>> Reply from 204.12.xx.yy: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=57 >>>> Reply from 204.12.xx.yy: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=57 >>>> Reply from 204.12.xx.yy: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=57 >>>> Ping statistics for 204.12.xx.yy: >>>> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), >>>> Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: >>>> Minimum = 14ms, Maximum = 25ms, Average = 17ms >>>> C:\Documents and Settings\nated> >>>> >>>> 2. utcapture of BAD performance using SDAC. >>>> r...@srs1(/root) >>>> # /opt/SUNWut/sbin/utcapture -r -s srs2 b976bba2338c4fcccf61d1c162ff1697 >>>> # TERMINALID TIMESTAMP TOTAL PACKET TOTAL LOSS BYTES SENT >>> PERCENT LOSS LATENCY >>>> b976bba2338c4fcccf61d1c162ff1697 20100301201048 2963 >>> 0 1557314 0.000 501.000 >>>> b976bba2338c4fcccf61d1c162ff1697 20100301201103 2963 >>> 0 1557314 0.000 501.000 >>>> 3. utcapture of GOOD performance using Sun Ray DTU (model 270). >>>> r...@srs1(/root) >>>> # /opt/SUNWut/sbin/utcapture -r -s srs2 00144fd354cc >>>> # TERMINALID TIMESTAMP TOTAL PACKET TOTAL LOSS BYTES SENT >>> PERCENT LOSS LATENCY >>>> 00144fd354cc 20100301201152 4744 21 483326 >>> 0.000 15.823 >>>> 4. ping showing that mtu up to and including 1300 is usable without >>> fragmentation. >>>> C:\Documents and Settings\nated>ping -l 1300 -f 204.12.152.133 >>>> Pinging 204.12.152.133 with 1300 bytes of data: >>>> Reply from 204.12.152.133: bytes=1300 time=56ms TTL=57 >>>> Reply from 204.12.152.133: bytes=1300 time=16ms TTL=57 >>>> Reply from 204.12.152.133: bytes=1300 time=22ms TTL=57 >>>> Reply from 204.12.152.133: bytes=1300 time=29ms TTL=57 >>>> Ping statistics for 204.12.152.133: >>>> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), >>>> Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: >>>> Minimum = 16ms, Maximum = 56ms, Average = 30ms >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: [email protected] [sunray-users- >>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of William Yang [[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 5:40 PM >>>> To: 'SunRay-Users mailing list' >>>> Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL:Re: EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop >>> AccessClient (SDAC / soft client) poor performance >>>> Maybe try Windows XP if you haven't already (sorry if I missed that you >>>> already tried). I'm on XP and performance is great. >>>> >>>> William Yang >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:sunray-users- >>>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Devin Nate >>>>> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 7:25 PM >>>>> To: SunRay-Users mailing list >>>>> Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL:Re: EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop >>>>> AccessClient (SDAC / soft client) poor performance >>>>> >>>>> Thanks Bob for the followup. >>>>> >>>>> I've been up and down over mtu ... that was my guess at first too. I >>> can >>>>> confirm by packet capture that SDAC is using a mtu no larger than the >>>>> slider in the client is set to for udp packets. Tcp packets appear to >>> be >>>>> using pmtud and getting an fine mtu also. >>>>> >>>>> I'm spinning up a host in our data center to test... but so far, no >>> good >>>>> solutions have come out of this. >>>>> >>>>> I suspect I'm going to need to get Oracle/Sun to open a case.. this is >>>>> frustrating enough that I'd like to get folks with access to the source >>>>> code involved. Where every other app works...? >>>>> >>>>> I may get a Solaris SRS running here as well for comparative testing. >>>>> >>>>> Anyhow, if anyone has any more ideas, let me know. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Devin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:sunray-users- >>>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Bob Doolittle >>>>> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 3:43 PM >>>>> To: SunRay-Users mailing list >>>>> Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL:Re: EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop >>>>> AccessClient (SDAC / soft client) poor performance >>>>> >>>>> MTU settings sound more plausible than uttsc to me. >>>>> uttsc should not affect latency as measured by utcapture - that's >>> purely >>>>> a metric measured between the X server and the client. >>>>> >>>>> -Bob >>>>> >>>>> Nishimura, Scott L (IT Solutions) wrote: >>>>>> Devin, >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll have to defer to more knowledgeable members of this list. The >>>>>> performance you describe, however, is suspiciously similar to what we >>>>>> experienced a few years back before we had tuned our MTU settings [we >>>>>> ultimately settled on 1470]: when going through a PowerPoint stack, >>>>>> we'd get 5-second delays in screen redraw. >>>>>> >>>>>> The only other time I've seen something like this was when I was using >>>>>> PCSC [PC Smart Card] 1.0 and when I got a normal workload on the SRS, >>>>>> pcscd started taking up 6% of the CPU and users would see many 5- >>> second >>>>>> delays during their session. >>>>>> >>>>>> Scott >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: [email protected] >>>>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Devin Nate >>>>>> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 2:27 PM >>>>>> To: SunRay-Users mailing list >>>>>> Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL:Re: EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop >>>>>> AccessClient (SDAC / soft client) poor performance >>>>>> >>>>>> Ahh, now that's something we haven't done yet... packet capture of the >>>>>> uttsc data. So far we've done a packet capture of the dtu<-->srss and >>>>>> compared with sdac<-->srss, and we couldn't see any difference there. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll report observations asap. >>>>>> >>>>>> That said, would a difference in uttsc traffic to the terminal servers >>>>>> cause utcapture to indicate a higher latency? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Devin >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: [email protected] >>>>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nishimura, >>> Scott >>>>>> L (IT Solutions) >>>>>> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 3:16 PM >>>>>> To: SunRay-Users mailing list >>>>>> Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL:Re: EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop Access >>>>>> Client (SDAC / soft client) poor performance >>>>>> >>>>>> Devin, >>>>>> >>>>>> How about if you run a truss or pstack or similar troubleshooting >>> tool >>>>>> on uttsc and compare the results between the actual DTU and SDAC? >>>>>> >>>>>> Does your sniffer test show excessive retransmissions? >>>>>> >>>>>> Also, what MTU size is being used? Too large [> 1470?] could lead to >>>>>> fragmentation; too small [< 500] could lead to "laggy" performance >>>>>> [we've run into that before on a physical DTU before]. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Scott >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: [email protected] >>>>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Devin Nate >>>>>> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 2:06 PM >>>>>> To: [email protected]; SunRay-Usersmailing list >>>>>> Subject: EXTERNAL:Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop Access >>> Client >>>>>> (SDAC / soft client) poor performance >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Lars; >>>>>> >>>>>> I completely agree... the problem is, the DTU and SDAC clients are on >>>>>> identical networks... in fact, I've taken the cable out of a perfect >>> DTU >>>>>> and put it into a PC. I was thinking perhaps QoS or something tagging >>>>>> the udp packages. >>>>>> >>>>>> The PCs have Intel nic's. I'm tracking down totally different >>>>>> architectures. Our core is all Cisco networking gear. We're looking to >>>>>> setup a host on the same LAN directly connected to the core, that said >>>>>> we had some hosts in the datacenter getting latency of 500.000, gig >>>>>> connected but on a different subnet. >>>>>> >>>>>> All that aside, the Sun DTU's work perfect on the same network. We're >>>>>> going through everything with a fine tooth comb, but I'm not >>> optimistic. >>>>>> More thoughts? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Devin >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: [email protected] >>>>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lars Tunkrans >>>>>> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 2:36 PM >>>>>> To: SunRay-Users mailing list >>>>>> Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] EXTERNAL: Sun Desktop Access Client (SDAC >>> / >>>>>> soft client) poor performance >>>>>> >>>>>> 2010-03-01 20:31, Devin Nate skrev: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm really appreciating the ideas, please keep them coming? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Devin >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> When I experience laggy screen updates on a DTU ist is usually >>>>>> becase there is >>>>>> a problem with the network . >>>>>> >>>>>> As the list can testify: >>>>>> >>>>>> One returning problem is Low end flaky L2 switches with a >>>>>> gigabit input from the CORE switch >>>>>> and 100Mbit link out to the DTU. These L2 switches drops UDP >>> packets >>>>>> and forces the DTU >>>>>> to ask for them again . Hence the Laggy screen updates. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Now heres a long shot..... >>>>>> >>>>>> if you are using mainly the same brand pc , do they all have the >>>>>> same LAN Card / CHipset ? >>>>>> There are many kinds of problems with Chinese wierdo combines of >>>>>> PHY / MAC chipsets. >>>>>> They come up with new combinations every week just to be able to >>>>>> produce the motherboard 5 cents >>>>>> cheaper. >>>>>> >>>>>> Should you try an Intel Pro1000 GT Desktop adaptor ? I >>> think >>>>>> so. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.intel.com/products/desktop/adapters/pro1000gt/pro1000gt- >>> overv >>>>>> iew.htm >>>>>> >>>>>> This is probably the the most stable ethernet card today, since >>>>>> 3COM stopped making >>>>>> ethernet cards. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Did you try to attach the PC directly to core switch yet ? >>>>>> >>>>>> //Lars >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> SunRay-Users mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users >>> -- >>> >>> Craig Bender >>> >>> >>> 1-877-255-1537 >>> >>> Sun Ray Engineering >>> Sun Microsystems >>> A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Oracle Corporation >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > -- > That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all. > -- Moliere > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Craig Bender 1-877-255-1537 Sun Ray Engineering Sun Microsystems A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Oracle Corporation _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ SunRay-Users mailing list [email protected] http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
