Help with Citrix Environments.

michaelpmcclure

Active Member
Hey List,

I need to take a poll of those of you using Citrix with OneWorld Xe. Please tell me whether you use the normal environment (i.e. PD7333) with your users on Citrix or the Terminal Server environment (i.e. WPD7333). I have a consulting firm here that is trying to convince me to use the normal environment for all of my users. Since this is contrary to what all documentation says to do, I need some help in making the decision. Right now I am opposed to this idea since 95% of my users are on Citrix.
 
I use the normal PD7333 & PY7333 environments with no problems.
Dave
 
Never ever have users log on to the normal PD7333 environment in citrix. In PD7333 you have default BSFN OCM mapping that are mapped to run locally. When you have all these users running BSFN locally you will have tremendous performance decrement on your citrix server. WPD7333 has default mapping to run on the app/Ent server but you will some mappings need to be run locally depending on the systems you use. Hope it helps.
 
We use the normal PD7333 environment with no problems.

Xe SP 18.1 HP-UX Citrix Metaframe XP FR2

Ed Luke
Sr. Applications Analyst
Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation
[email protected]
(615) 341-8320

Caterpillar Confidential: Green



Ed Luke
Sr Applications Analyst
Caterpillar Financial Services
615 341-8320
Xe Update 5 SP18.1 HP9000 Oracle 8.1.7
 
We have for several years run the normal PD7333 environment in Citrix with
no noticeable performance issues on our servers. We are using GL, AR, AP,
FA, Inv, POs, WOs, Job Cost, Service Billing along with parts of Time
Accounting and Plant and Equipment.

Dave Rammer
Sheboygan County IS Dept

XE w/U2 SP16 / Oracle 8.1.7.3 / Ent: HP-UX 11i / App: W2K
Citrix MetaFrame 1.8 SP2
 
re[2]: Help with Citrix Environments.

<BODY text="#000000" link="#0000FF
<font style="font-family:'Arial';font-size:10pt;We use the normal PD7333 and
PY7333 with no problems too.


Tet Hadavas

OneWorld Xe, SP17.1, Windows 2000, SQL 2000


>> I use the normal PD733 & PY7333 environments with no
>> Dave

>> SQL 2000 SP1, One World XE Base, SP 20, Metaframe XP

>> --------------------------

>> To view this thread, go to:

>> </font><a
nt
>> + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+

>> This is the JDEList One World® / XE mailing list/forum.

>> Archives and information on how to SUBSCRIBE, and

>> UNSUBSCRIBE can be found on the JDEList Forum at

>> </font><a href="http://www.JDEList.com<font
ont style="font-family:'Arial';font-size:10pt;

>> JDEList is not affiliated with JDEdwards®

>> + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+</font></body
 
We use the normal environments on our Citrix Boxes (i.e. PD7333, PY7333, DV7333), I was told that you want to get away from using the "W" environments. From what I have been told the "W" environments were developed for WAN environments back in 7.3.3.2. Now that XE has been released the mappings and connections have all been re-worked and are now much better. Our consultant that we use just did a job that was using the "W" environments, that he switched to the normal environment. His results were apps that took 15 seconds to open now took 3 seconds to open, your performance is going to be slower and you will use more Enterprise Server with the "W". We also have a high percentage (90%-95%) on Citrix and have no problems with the environments. From what I have seen and heard I would go with what the consultant is telling you, and no I am not a Consultant, just an everyday Admin.

Josh Littrell
CNC Engineer
 
Michael,

Have have used both the "Normal" and the "W" environments for Citrix and TSE users. I have found that if you want to get more users onto the server, then use the "W" environment. But you may find that switching the logic to run on the enterprise server may impact performance. If that is the case, you might consider adding a Logic server and map the "W" logic to this server.

However, I always start by using the normal environment and switch to "W" if I need more performance on the Citrix Server.


Hope this helps with your decision.

andy
 
We use the W environment on our 4 citrix servers that have about 12 - 20 users each. However, it was not until a few months ago that the default BSFN mapping for this environment was switched to the logic server. This was suggested by JDE to help our memory error problem but it didn't do anything in that regard. Since doing so we will occasionally see a memory error on the logic server from a BSFN crashing. I really didn't see any difference in memory usage on the terminal servers after the switch and I believe there is enough processor power on servers these days to handle either mapping, you'll run out of memory before processor. I would stay with the W environment for users on a terminal server and perhaps then decide where you want to map, you don't know if JDE will add an enhancement to the W enviroment that be beneficial to terminal servers.
 
Michael,

We tried both, and went back to the standard configuration of executing BSFNs locally on the terminal server. Our performance was slower with using an App server in concert with our Citrix terminal servers. As it is, our terminal servers are not CPU contrained or memory constrained by processing BSFNs local. By the way, the final straw in our changing our configuration back was the advice of a JDE GATS guy who advised AGAINST the W environment.

Gregg Larkin
North American CNC Praxair (employee, not a consultant).
XE, SP19.1, Win2K Clustered Enterprise server, SQL 2k, 18 Citrix XP terminal servers serving 2300 users in five countries.
 
Given the extremely fast INTEL processors you can buy today and the amount of RAM you can now pile into a 2000/TSE box, the need for the W* environments had pretty much disappeared. It was a valid need when JDE first introduced the TSE solution, but much has changed since then.

For most BSFNS, the time it takes for a JDENET BSFN call to go across a LAN to an APP or ENT server, process, and return the results to the TSE box is slower than running the same function locally. The only real exception is if you mapped your W* environment BSFN's to run on your Enterprise Server, and the function you call is VERY data intensive. In that case, it may run faster if mapped to your Enterprise Server. But most BSFN's aren't reading enough data to make this a reason for running BSFN logic on your Enterprise Server.

So, if you need to pile a very large number of concurrent users on a single TSE box, then instead of using an APP server and W* environments, in most cases you would be better served just getting a second TSE box and using the regular environments. (i.e. run all BSFN's locally)
 
200+ users, 95% of them are using W* environments with BF mapped to the enterprise server by default. (by the way, in many installations even in W* environment functions are NOT mapped to the enterprise server by DEFAULT).

We did not really see a big performance difference, but we did not perform any real tests.

The major issues we had with W* environments is that mappings 'out of the box' are not always correct.
We had to re-map locally about 15 business functions so far, since they were crashing on the server in certain cases.

Regards
 
Hi
Is there any BSFNs that should be left to run on the server? I'm curious to
try this out since we have upgraded our terminal servers to Xeon 2.8s and
they have plenty of "grunt" to spare.

Thanks
Kieran Mahony
JDE and AS/400 Administrator




Given the extremely fast INTEL processors you can buy today and the amount
of RAM you can now pile into a 2000/TSE box, the need for the W*
environments had pretty much disappeared. It was a valid need when JDE
first introduced the TSE solution, but much has changed since then.

For most BSFNS, the time it takes for a JDENET BSFN call to go across a LAN
to an APP or ENT server, process, and return the results to the TSE box is
slower than running the same function locally. The only real exception is
if you mapped your W* environment BSFN's to run on your Enterprise Server,
and the function you call is VERY data intensive. In that case, it may run
faster if mapped to your Enterprise Server. But most BSFN's aren't reading
enough data to make this a reason for running BSFN logic on your Enterprise
Server.

So, if you need to pile a very large number of concurrent users on a single
TSE box, then instead of using an APP server and W* environments, in most
cases you would b!
e better served just getting a second TSE box and using the regular
environments. (i.e. run all BSFN's locally)
David Ross McIlmoyl
TeamCain
--------------------------
To view this thread, go to:
http://www.jdelist.com/ubb/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=OW&Number=52774
+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+
This is the JDEList One World® / XE mailing list/forum.
Archives and information on how to SUBSCRIBE, and
UNSUBSCRIBE can be found on the JDEList Forum at
http://www.JDEList.com

JDEList is not affiliated with JDEdwards®

+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+




CONFIDENTIALITY : This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be
privileged. If you are not a named recipient, please notify the sender
immediately and do not disclose the contents to another person, use it for any
purpose or store or copy the information in any medium.



AS400 V4R5, Win2000, Xe Sp17.1
 

Similar threads

E9.2 Request to please let me know- if we can get free instance to practice few of HCM Approval transactions ? I tried to access Steltix- But not helpful
Replies
0
Views
275
Manju_9966
XE Is anyone still using Citrix?
Replies
3
Views
1K
Rauf
Rauf
aostdiek
E9.2 Form Request Username to Populate in Audit fields
Replies
3
Views
922
aostdiek
aostdiek
E9.2 JDE 9.2 Platform Upgrade Challenges
Replies
7
Views
2K
MFreitag
MFreitag
DSauve
E9.2 Remembering form data from previous transactions
Replies
2
Views
1K
DSauve
DSauve
Back
Top