> We are trying to run X applications (like Xemacs) over the
> network from one remote office to our us office; The link is
> slow (i tested that with tools like traceroute, iperf and
> ipchar) with several bottlenecks and we already tried some
> tricks to optimize the application performance like running
> the ssh client with the -x and +C flags to compress packets
> and avoiding ssh to do X forwarding and using the X windows
> lbxproxy (playing also with the -zlevel); We played a little
> bit with dxce but the windows binaries are quite old and is
> more complicated to use than lbxproxy.
>
> Application performance gain has been marginal so far.
Let me suggest you something different:
VNC-Server and Client
Its pretty similar to what you are trying to do with the X system,
but it might perform better in your specific case. Its available
as open source and for free from AT&T/Olivetti labs in the UK.
I've running VNC for a good time now in several configurations.
The last one was a Win<->Win experimental setup trough the Windows
provided RAS/DFUe-Server with two 56k modems running at just 33.6
and it was sufficient bandwidth. The only bottleneck was the startup
phase where VNC insists of transfering some 500 kB of rubbish data
(black screen with ramdom pixels) before the real screen contents do
arrive. But this should be a fixable thing for an average programmer.
I am just sorry that you didnt specify the available bandwidth and
and the amount of concurrently users, so that a rough estimation
for a working solution is not doable.
VNC is something intermediate and matches from a remote control program
to a remote x-server alike setup. It can export multiple desktops
for multiple users and even if the connection fails, the data is
not lost at all, meaning its really only a viewer.
> There other tricks to make X applications (particulary
> Xemacs) to run faster over a slow link? (iptables settings on
> Linux, Xemacs parameters, etc)?
>
> Any suggestions will be really appreciated, thanks in advance
>
> JV
>
> PD: I'm aware than using a control software tool is better to
> work with the source files (thus the user works on a local
> checked out copy of the file) but this user will not have
> access to a Linux box for a long time (and we don't have the
> windows client versions of the software control tool). Also i
> know than running emacs instead of Xemacs (even Gvim wich i
> love!) is faster but again this is a requirement from the
> remote office.
Sorry to the Xperts, i dont wanted to offend you, but when
looking for the best solution, the alternatives should be
considered. Without a competition evolvement would slow down.
-Alex
