Performance of Terminal Server environments?

msuters

msuters

Active Member
Hi all,

Our Terminal Server environments (the W environments, eg WPD7334) show
poorer performance than our "fat client" environments (eg PD7334). For
example, there is a noticeable difference in the time it takes to do a
Find on the Address book (P01012), on the Voucher Entry (P0411) and
other screens. The difference seems to happen in a wide variety of
applications. The performance difference is very noticeable, and a great
negative influence on the perception of JDE in our organisation.

In the W environments, most business functions are mapped to run on the
application server, rather than running locally on the client. The
performance hit may come from the overhead of the client communicating
with the application server to run the business functions, or from the
code on the server running more slowly than on the client. (It is not
the performance of the server itself. A fat client installed on the
server runs as well as any other fat client, but the W environment still
runs more slowly.)

JDE have been looking at this problem for over a week now, but have not
suggested any option for improving the performance of the W environment,
apart from using OCM to map the business functions to run locally. But
then we might as well not use the W environments at all.

Firstly, have other people seen this difference in performance between W
environments and fat clients? If so, what can we do to resolve the
problem?

Secondly, is there a danger mapping the business functions to run
locally in the W environments? I have heard that if the citrix server
becomes overloaded, business functions can fail during operations,
causing data integrity issues. Have people seen this, is it a danger, or
is it just hearsay?

Thanks,
Mark Suters
ERP8, U1, SP22_F1, Win2000, SQL2000, Citrix XP FR3

------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Mark Suters - Senior Network and Applications Engineer
Stockland Group
P: 02 9561 2671 F: 02 9020 8323 M: 0417 318 245
E: [email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
#####################################################################################
Note:
This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential,
proprietary or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege
is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message in error,
please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any
hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly,
use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not
the intended recipient. Stockland and any of its subsidiaries each reserve
the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where
the message states otherwise and the sender is authorized to state them to be the
views of any such entity.

Thank You.
#####################################################################################
 
Mark,
Many clients I've been at have seen the same things you are speaking of.
Most new clients, or I should say clients new to OW/ERP and electing to
use the WTS/Citrix client solution have opted NOT to use the "W"
environments. Of course, diligent administration of the WTS's can also
aid in keeping them running smoothly. Such as a full package deployment
once a week along with a cold boot. Having plenty of RAM (2GB per
processor minimum). Only publishing OW/ERP and not other applications
(other than something like Excel for data exporting purposes). Making
sure you have correct and up to date DBMS connectivity software...for
instance, there's a version of MDAC that has known, "non workaroundable"
performance issues. And of course, finding the threads on this forum
which often contain tips and tricks that you won't find from Peoplesoft
(JD Edwards officially is gone this weekend), including screen resolution
and the such.

Regards,

Jim

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
 
To 'W' or not is a popular thread in this forum.

The Cost of Ownership of the 'W' environments is much higher than the cost to buy larger or more terminal servers.

By Cost of Ownership, I am referring to:
* Slower performance for end users since BSFN calls must traverse the LAN.
* Higher complexity (trying to track down performance problems like yours become very challenging.)
* Stability/Reliability issues (it works in the regular environment but not the 'W' environment type issues)
 
Jermey,

Just our 2 cents worth:

>>* Slower performance for end users since BSFN calls must traverse the LAN.
We have found that sending BSFN C/S data across the lan is MUCH less expensive than sending the OW DATA across the LAN. If you choose your BSFN's carefully you can decrease your lan traffic by up to 75% (using our measurments)
* Higher complexity (trying to track down performance problems like yours become very challenging.)
True, but tracking down performance problems is challenging anyway, the delta for BSFN's is minimal, especially when you factor in that the tools on the ES are normally far superior to the tools you get to use on Windows.
* Stability/Reliability issues (it works in the regular environment but not the 'W' environment type issues)
We have been on OW for 3 years with about 600 concurrent users, we have had 4 incidents where something worked on fat clients but did not work on TSE's. The stability issues we have encountered were due to TSE and not to the 'W' environments. As far as reliability, we have better up time in the TSE environment that fat client, although much of this is due to only the developers have fat client.

Tom Davidson
 
I generally agree with Tom.

Normally, I would only map Master BF to the E/S (it's only about 50 or so of
the biggest ones). This does improve performance, although this is true that
mapping Minor BF to the E/S slows W environments down...

Regards,
Alexander Pastuhov
Pastuhov Consulting Pty. Ltd.
E-Mail: [email protected]
Mobile: 0414 453 433
WWW: http://www.pastuhov.com.au/index.htm


RESTRICTIONS ON USE REPRODUCTION OR DISCLOSURE
The information contained in this email and attachments (if any) is intended
to be communicated only to the person or persons named as addressees.
Copyright subsists in this email. If you are not named as an addressee you
are prohibited from using, reproducing, or disclosing the information in
this email and the existence of this email itself. The information in this
email may also be confidential and subject to professional privilege.
If so, all rights are reserved by the owner of those rights. If you are not
a named addressee please advise us immediately and destroy all copies of
this email in your possession or control. Pastuhov Consulting Pty. Ltd.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom_Davidson" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 1:35 AM
Subject: Re: Performance of Terminal Server environments?


LAN.
expensive than sending the OW DATA across the LAN. If you choose your
BSFN's carefully you can decrease your lan traffic by up to 75% (using our
measurments)
become very challenging.)
delta for BSFN's is minimal, especially when you factor in that the tools on
the ES are normally far superior to the tools you get to use on Windows.
not the 'W' environment type issues)
had 4 incidents where something worked on fat clients but did not work on
TSE's. The stability issues we have encountered were due to TSE and no!
in the TSE environment that fat client, although much of this is due to only
the developers have fat client.
7.0, Two Instances English/Western European & Japanese
http://www.jdelist.com/ubb/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=OW&Number=60808
messages, login to http://www.jdelist.com/forums, click Control Panel, then
click Edit by "Subscribe / Unsubscribe from receiving board posts by email,
change message notifications, etc." and adjust your subscription
preferences. JDEList is not affiliated with JDEdwards®
 
Alex,
You recommend mapping only 50 Master BFs to the Enterprise server in the
W environments. Which ones are those, how can I decide which are the
Master BFs? Is there a list on the KG somewhere?
Thanks,
Mark

------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Mark Suters - Senior Network and Applications Engineer
Stockland Group
P: 02 9561 2671 F: 02 9020 8323 M: 0417 318 245
E: [email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
 
Mark,

All BSFN's have an attribute "Function Type" - it is either 1, 2, or 3 for
Master, Major and Minor functions respectively.

The job to easily create OCM mappings for BSFN's per Environment is R986140
(in the GH9012 menu), just add an extra Data Selection line for the
"Function Type" to be equal to Literal "1" when you run it (you'll need to
run it as many times as the number of "W" environments you are setting up -
once for each one). Works like a dream. If you find any exceptions, they are
always easy to fix (if you really do - please, post them here, so that this
post becomes a complete central reference for any future inquiries on the
subject).

Make sure your Server Maps don't have any any BSFN mappings in their copies
of the OCM - it's usually pointless, just makes the table bigger, and
possibly dangerous, if the mappings are wrong.

Beware that some CNC operations (like adding a new TSE through a Plan) will
reset these mappings to the standard "All BSFN's on the Server" set of
mappings and then, this will have to be re-done. Just keep an eye on it...

Regards,
Alexander Pastuhov
Pastuhov Consulting Pty. Ltd.
E-Mail: [email protected]
Mobile: 0414 453 433
WWW: http://www.pastuhov.com.au/index.htm
CNC Consulting and a variety of Software Tools for OneWorld®
Check out our Special Offers: http://www.pastuhov.com.au/special_offers.htm

RESTRICTIONS ON USE REPRODUCTION OR DISCLOSURE
The information contained in this email and attachments (if any) is intended
to be communicated only to the person or persons named as addressees.
Copyright subsists in this email. If you are not named as an addressee you
are prohibited from using, reproducing, or disclosing the information in
this email and the existence of this email itself. The information in this
email may also be confidential and subject to professional privilege.
If so, all rights are reserved by the owner of those rights. If you are not
a named addressee please advise us immediately and destroy all copies of
this email in your possession or control. Pastuhov Consulting Pty. Ltd.


----- Original Message -----
From: "msuters" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 1:07 PM
Subject: RE: Performance of Terminal Server environments?


http://www.jdelist.com/ubb/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=OW&Number=60848
messages, login to http://www.jdelist.com/forums, click Control Panel, then
click Edit by "Subscribe / Unsubscribe from receiving board posts by email,
change message notifications, etc." and adjust your subscription
preferences. JDEList is not affiliated with JDEdwards®
 
The problem with mapping only master business functions is that J. D. Edwards occassionally passes memory Pointers between functions rather than their more typical Data Structures. A BSFN running on one computer cannot access a memory location on another. According to SAR 4703820 this is still a problem even in ERP 9.0.

Business functions that operate in this manner must be mapped to the same location. In the Pre-Xe days, JDE maintained a list on these BSFN dependencies, I have not seen a current copy of that list in quite some time.
 
Yes, this is true. What I suggest is that the mappings are tested and any
exceptions are mapped back to LOCAL...

Regards,
Alexander Pastuhov
Pastuhov Consulting Pty. Ltd.
E-Mail: [email protected]
Mobile: 0414 453 433
WWW: http://www.pastuhov.com.au/index.htm
CNC Consulting and Software Tools for OneWorld®
Check out our Special Offers at:
http://www.pastuhov.com.au/special_offers.htm

RESTRICTIONS ON USE REPRODUCTION OR DISCLOSURE
The information contained in this email and attachments (if any) is intended
to be communicated only to the person or persons named as addressees.
Copyright subsists in this email. If you are not named as an addressee you
are prohibited from using, reproducing, or disclosing the information in
this email and the existence of this email itself. The information in this
email may also be confidential and subject to professional privilege.
If so, all rights are reserved by the owner of those rights. If you are not
a named addressee please advise us immediately and destroy all copies of
this email in your possession or control. Pastuhov Consulting Pty. Ltd.

----- Original Message -----
From: "shearerj" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: Performance of Terminal Server environments?


Edwards occassionally passes memory Pointers between functions rather than
their more typical Data Structures. A BSFN running on one computer cannot
access a memory location on another. According to SAR 4703820 this is still
a problem even in ERP 9.0.
location. In the Pre-Xe days, JDE maintained a list on these BSFN
dependencies, I have not seen a current copy of that list in quite some
time.
http://www.jdelist.com/ubb/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=OW&Number=60862
messages, login to http://www.jdelist.com/forums, click Control Panel, then
click Edit by "Subscribe / Unsubscribe from receiving board posts by email,
change message notifications, etc." and adjust your subscription
preferences. JDEList is not affiliated with JDEdwards®
 
Back
Top