[THIN] Re: Profiles on Citrix
- From: Michael Pardee <pardeemp.list@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 06:45:35 -0400
We¹ve been testing Tricerat¹s Simplify Profiles product and just ran in to
the same issue with the Internet Explorer Branding policy. What we¹ve
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 ³branding...² part of the logon process flew by in a
second or two. Haven¹t had a lot of time to go back and figure all of this
out yet, but I¹m 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>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 10:38:33 +0100
To: <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> > 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]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:
