[THIN] Re: Profiles on Citrix

  • From: Michael Pardee <pardeemp.list@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 07:35:48 -0400

Exactly.  My goal is to provide 20 second logon and logoff performance for
all of our users.  We are right about there.  After shaking some bugs out
with Tricerat I think Simplify will fit the need.  We were able to get Flex
down even faster, but I guess officially we cheated.  Instead of telling
Flex what we wanted to ³roam² for the user, we went the opposite route and
told it to grab everything except for certain keys.  That¹s probably not the
recommended way, but the logos were unbelievably fast ­ less than 10 seconds
at the time.

From: Toby <toby.percival@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 12:23:46 +0100
To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [THIN] Re: Profiles on Citrix

Thanks Michael, I will try the same. Anything to improve the mood of our
beloved users!

On 5/18/07, Michael Pardee <pardeemp.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> We've been testing Tricerat's Simplify Profiles product and just ran in to the
> same issue with the Internet Explorer Branding policy.  What we've noticed is
> that it may have something to do with the mandatory profile that we are using.
> It was built from a system with IE, moved to a common network share, and then
> locked down via permissions.  Just for grins I copied that mandatory profile
> to a test share and applied it to a few of us that are testing.  I then opened
> up the permissions to see if that made any difference and the "branding..."
> part of the logon process flew by in a second or two.  Haven't had a lot of
> time to go back and figure all of this out yet, but I'm going to see if we can
> figure out what pieces need updated in our mandatory profile for IE7, make the
> changes, and then lock the profile down again.
> Not sure if this is the same thing that is slowing you down, but it is what
> seems to be causing it in our environment.  Thanks for reminding me that I
> need to dig in to this one again.
> From: Toby <toby.percival@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: < thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >
> Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 10:38:33 +0100
> To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  <mailto:thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >
> Subject: [THIN] Re: Profiles on Citrix
> 45 seconds is a long time. In fact, I have just timed logging in from a client
> pc, using a mandatory profile, located on the DC, and it took 57 seconds. I
> repeated the same test on multiple servers, and the time averaged 59 seconds.
> 0-7 seconds - applying personal settings, registry settings
> 8-40 seconds - applying internet explorer branding policy
> 40-42 - applying personal settings
> 43 - 59 secs - applying login scripts
> System is PS4.5, Windows 2003 Server SP2, with IE7.
> I believe IE7 is responsible for slowing the time down by 15 seconds or more.
> I will investigate how I can improve the load time of the 'internet explorer
> branding policy'.
> On 5/18/07, Angus Macdonald <Angus.Macdonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> It's hard to say with any certainty. Presumably your mandatory profile is
>> being dragged from a network location whereas our defaults are stored locally
>> on each server. Conversely, the flex profile loading takes a finite amount of
>> time. I wouldn't imagine you'd see a great performance increase with flex
>> profiles. 45 secs sounds like a lot of time though. Can you guess how much of
>> that is profile loading and processing? In my (not considerable) experience,
>> all sorts of things can slow logins.
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf
>>> Of Toby
>>> Sent: 18 May 2007 10:12
>>> To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [THIN] Re: Profiles on Citrix
>>> Hi Angus,
>>> As we are using 95% mandatory profiles, the only issue I have encountered is
>>> performance. For example, a user logon takes approximately 45 seconds,
>>> including login scripts etc.. Would you be able to guestimate how much time
>>> I could save by using flex?
>>> Thanks
>>> T.
>>> On 5/18/07, Angus Macdonald < Angus.Macdonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> <mailto:Angus.Macdonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> <mailto:Angus.Macdonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
>>>> We had all sorts of profile troubles before went with flex profiles.
>>>> Everybody gets a default profile at login, which is then modified by
>>>> loading the flex component and a bit of Kix -scripting for particular
>>>> groups. At logout the flex settings are saved before the profile type is
>>>> tweaked in the registry to make it appear as a mandatory profile, ensuring
>>>> it's dropped as the session closes.
>>>> Since starting down this route, our profile problems have vanished.
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  <mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> <mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [ mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>>>> <mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]> On Behalf Of bbeckett2000@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> Sent: 17 May 2007 21:08
>>>>> To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> Subject: [THIN] Profiles on Citrix
>>>>> Gentlemen:
>>>>> Running PS 4.0 on Windows 2003 servers. About a dozen servers.
>>>>> We've been using roaming profiles straight out of the box, MS box, for a
>>>>> while now. They're ok but just the nature of the beast in how they work
>>>>> will cause their fair share of problems. I know there are several
>>>>> alternatives out there, flex profiles for one. Can anyone give me some
>>>>> feedback on your implementation and results for any solution, be it flex
>>>>> profiles or some other alternative? I've heard talk of some type of
>>>>> database or dynamic solution that sounded good.

Other related posts: