OT- Terminal Server Specs

Hi Guys,

We have a terminal server in an sbs environment and having some performance
issues.

The terminal server is an IBM x3400 Windows 2003 SP2, 4Gb ECC, 4 x 73Gb SAS
15K Raid 10 config.

However when all the users (some 70) log on is slows down.

Can anyone recommend anything to speed it up?

Would having 2 raid 1/0 sets and splitting OS/profiles/page file help?

Any help would be appreciated.

John,

I would suggest you are pretty much at the practical limit of a single
server operation there for a general purpose TS Server. You should consider
adding an additional server and splitting the load.

You are pretty much at the memory limit for Windows 2003 Standard edition,
and my experience is that 65-70 users is where you run into instability and
slowdown increasing significantly. I find the sweet spot of load to be in
the 35-50 user range.

TS apps servers tend to become choked primarily based upon RAM unless you
are running specific disk intensive operations in background, such as SQL
services in addition to the client applications. While it's true that some
strategic improvement in multi-user operations can come from having split
spindles for paging, there's no point in making that a RAID other than for
bragging rights. I wouldn't expect adding another spindle to make a
significant difference in your performance unless you are seeing the disks
currently at a constant rolling of activity non-stop. Most of the work is in
RAM up to the point you run out of RAM, then everything starts paging and at
that point you are collapsing operations to disk based, not RAM based, but
the disk speed isn't the problem. The problem is that no matter how many
drives you install, if you have completely depleted the RAM....you are in a
slow crash condition.

- Jeff Middleton SBS-MVP



"JohnG" <> wrote in message
news:4b0fb208$...
> Hi Guys,
>
> We have a terminal server in an sbs environment and having some
> performance issues.
>
> The terminal server is an IBM x3400 Windows 2003 SP2, 4Gb ECC, 4 x 73Gb
> SAS 15K Raid 10 config.
>
> However when all the users (some 70) log on is slows down.
>
> Can anyone recommend anything to speed it up?
>
> Would having 2 raid 1/0 sets and splitting OS/profiles/page file help?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>

In article <4b0fb208$>, says...
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> We have a terminal server in an sbs environment and having some performance
> issues.
>
> The terminal server is an IBM x3400 Windows 2003 SP2, 4Gb ECC, 4 x 73Gb SAS
> 15K Raid 10 config.
>
> However when all the users (some 70) log on is slows down.
>
> Can anyone recommend anything to speed it up?
>
> Would having 2 raid 1/0 sets and splitting OS/profiles/page file help?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.

I live with Terminal Server (Windows) and find that somewhere between
30-50 users is the limit when doing non-graphics work. Many of our
clients are pharmacy related and have Dual Screen Wyse/Neoware clients,
so there is a lot of screen updates as they flip through thousands of
pages each day...

I also happen to have experience with the IBM x3400 and the x3800
servers in a T/S environment.

Doing raid 0+1 is going to help a little, but you don't mention how many
CPU's you have and what speed - we normally get Dual CPU's in every
server, but you can order the x3400 without the second CPU.

Personally, since drives are cheap, I don't short the drive count on a
shared system - the x3400 will hold 6 drives if I remember correctly,
the x3800 holds 12 - I always max out the drives in a server. Keep in
mind that a 4 x Drives RAID-5 is not an ideal solution for Terminal
Server, since there are many reads/writes. You should also consider the
caching on the controller card - I believe they default to 50/50 for
read/write and the controller is set for "Write Through" instead of
"Write Back" - Write Back will help with performance if you bought the
RAID card batter and a good UPS (to prevent data loss in a power
outage).

There are many tweeks you can use to control screen updates/background
clutter, etc... These are done in the GPO so that you can limit CPU time
for each users session.

You really need to run PERFMON and determine where the actual bottle
neck is.

In the case of one company, they have about 80 users on the T/S each
shift, we had to split them into two x3400 terminal servers.

--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.
Trust yourself.
(remove 999 for proper email address)

You're hitting up against the practical limit of a 32-bit terminal server.
You could try splitting out the RAID, and adding an additional network card,
but it's unlikely that will resolve the issue. Certainly it's worth looking
at perfmon to see where the slowdown is. However, there are just practical
limits on a 32-bit TS that are caused by the limits of the host OS. Your
choices are:

1.) Add an additional terminal server. You can use connection broker to load
balance or simply do static assignments.
2.) Replace the existing TS with a server running 64-bit Windows Server. If
you do, I'd plan on a server with at least 8GB of RAM for this level of use.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/russel




"JohnG" <> wrote in message
news:4b0fb208$...
> Hi Guys,
>
> We have a terminal server in an sbs environment and having some
> performance issues.
>
> The terminal server is an IBM x3400 Windows 2003 SP2, 4Gb ECC, 4 x 73Gb
> SAS 15K Raid 10 config.
>
> However when all the users (some 70) log on is slows down.
>
> Can anyone recommend anything to speed it up?
>
> Would having 2 raid 1/0 sets and splitting OS/profiles/page file help?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>

Thanks guys, very helpful.

More to this if I may:

1. The x3400 server has 1 x QC 2.66Ghz, option for a second.
2. It was an existing server for 20-30 users, but there is a need for about
100+
3. I have looked at perfmon, memory does creep up, I don't check it regulary
(and when ALL users are on), but it seems to have 'spare'.
4. Pagefile gets to about 5.5Gb. Set for about 8Gb.

Ok, I agree it has reached the OS operational limits, just wondering on the
hardware limits.

What do you think of this on the same x3400 server:

1. Windows 2008 32/64?
2. Say 8-12Gb memory
3. Add a CPU?
4. Possibly add a nic
5. Possibly hard drives?

The other option is we have access to an IBM x3500 ear marked for an
Exchange server. However I guess I could swap those two around with the
following configs

1. Say 12Gb memory
2. Say 2 x Raid 1
3. Disk caching raid battery backed
4. 2 x QC CPU
5. Win 2008 x64
6. It already has dual nics

OR is the best solution to get another server to split the load?

Thanks again.

In article <4b105d40$>, says...
>
> Thanks guys, very helpful.
>
> More to this if I may:
>
> 1. The x3400 server has 1 x QC 2.66Ghz, option for a second.
> 2. It was an existing server for 20-30 users, but there is a need for about
> 100+
> 3. I have looked at perfmon, memory does creep up, I don't check it regulary
> (and when ALL users are on), but it seems to have 'spare'.
> 4. Pagefile gets to about 5.5Gb. Set for about 8Gb.
>
> Ok, I agree it has reached the OS operational limits, just wondering on the
> hardware limits.
>
> What do you think of this on the same x3400 server:
>
> 1. Windows 2008 32/64?

64 Bit if your apps will support it - if you stick with 32 bit you will
have the same memory limitations that you have now.

> 2. Say 8-12Gb memory

8GB at least, but, you may not use all of it.

> 3. Add a CPU?

Always - if you don't have DUAL CPU's, Quad Core, then you're going to
take a hit again.

> 4. Possibly add a nic

May not matter, teaming them, if you can make it work, helps, but I'm
betting that a 1gbps single NIC is not your bottle neck

> 5. Possibly hard drives?

As many as you can afford - regardless of size, as long as it's at least
a large as needed, the more drives the better the file performance. You
also want a quality caching raid controller.

> The other option is we have access to an IBM x3500 ear marked for an
> Exchange server. However I guess I could swap those two around with the
> following configs
>
> 1. Say 12Gb memory
> 2. Say 2 x Raid 1

Add more drives, at least 4 drives setup as RAID 0+1, at least.

> 3. Disk caching raid battery backed
> 4. 2 x QC CPU
> 5. Win 2008 x64
> 6. It already has dual nics
>
> OR is the best solution to get another server to split the load?

If you can't get all x64 apps, ones that run on x64, then you're going
to have to keep the old server for those apps, a new server, since this
one is already marked for exchange, might be cheaper.

As for your "marked for exchange" - you should have MORE DRIVES AGAIN,
at least 4 drive in a RAID 0+1 or 6 drives in a RAID 5, for that many
users - depending on the way you limit user accounts size.



--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.
Trust yourself.
(remove 999 for proper email address)

If the x3400 server supports x64, then:

1.) Add RAM. More is better, but at least 8 GB for sure.
2.) Add second CPU, certainly. You're pushing up against it with that many
users
3.) You're currently at 4 drives in a RAID 0+1. I'd really like to see 8
drives in RAID 0+1 if you can swing it. It's not about the size of the
drives, but the number of them, when it comes to optimizing I/O.
4.) Server 2k8 x64 is a better choice than Server 2k3 x64. But you'd need to
upgrade your TS CALs.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/russel




"JohnG" <> wrote in message
news:4b105d40$...
> Thanks guys, very helpful.
>
> More to this if I may:
>
> 1. The x3400 server has 1 x QC 2.66Ghz, option for a second.
> 2. It was an existing server for 20-30 users, but there is a need for
> about 100+
> 3. I have looked at perfmon, memory does creep up, I don't check it
> regulary (and when ALL users are on), but it seems to have 'spare'.
> 4. Pagefile gets to about 5.5Gb. Set for about 8Gb.
>
> Ok, I agree it has reached the OS operational limits, just wondering on
> the hardware limits.
>
> What do you think of this on the same x3400 server:
>
> 1. Windows 2008 32/64?
> 2. Say 8-12Gb memory
> 3. Add a CPU?
> 4. Possibly add a nic
> 5. Possibly hard drives?
>
> The other option is we have access to an IBM x3500 ear marked for an
> Exchange server. However I guess I could swap those two around with the
> following configs
>
> 1. Say 12Gb memory
> 2. Say 2 x Raid 1
> 3. Disk caching raid battery backed
> 4. 2 x QC CPU
> 5. Win 2008 x64
> 6. It already has dual nics
>
> OR is the best solution to get another server to split the load?
>
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>
>