[THIN] Re: VMware & CPS 4.5
- From: "Steve Greenberg" <steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 11:44:34 -0700
Exactly, 4GB RAM used to be a lot to work with and with dual sockets it was
a great "sweet spot" for PS. Nowadays with multi-core and an increasing
number of apps requiring mega-ram the situation is shifting. Add to that the
general availability of 64 bit OS's and virtualization and now there are a
whole host of considerations that are relatively new. The "it depends"
factor is bigger than ever before..
Steve Greenberg
Thin Client Computing
34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453
Scottsdale, AZ 85266
(602) 432-8649
www.thinclient.net
steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Jon Luchette
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 11:04 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: VMware & CPS 4.5
I understand completely, and when given the chance I will always recommend
customers test it out with their applications before making the decision.
However, as we all know many times customers are not able to test ahead of
time, so a good place to start your servers at is 4GB of RAM...
On Fri, Feb 1, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Dobry, Wes <Wes.Dobry@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Bingo.
I didn't mention, but I guess I should have. Your mileage may vary
considerably and it really should be tested in your own environment. I did,
however, want to express that in our environment we did see significant
improvements by upping the RAM in our presentation servers.
-Wes Dobry
(321) 843-5590
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Steve Greenberg
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 12:34 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: VMware & CPS 4.5
This is entirely dependent on application and system utilization. The
additional RAM gives you more user space memory but the 2GB kernel limit is
still there so in some cases it works and in others it does not
Steve Greenberg
Thin Client Computing
34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453
Scottsdale, AZ 85266
(602) 432-8649
<http://www.thinclient.net/> www.thinclient.net
steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Dobry, Wes
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 9:36 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: VMware & CPS 4.5
We get about a 35% increase in users when tossing 8gb of RAM instead of 4gb
in a CPS4.5 server using PAE.
-Wes Dobry
(321) 843-5590
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Jon Luchette
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 11:28 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: VMware & CPS 4.5
In general I have seen that 4GB of RAM is the maximum amount of memory that
Citrix boxes will efficiently use on a 32 bit Terminal Services Windows
server operating system. This has to do with the 2GB kernel memory
limitation:
http://www.brianmadden.com/content/article/The-4GB-Windows-Memory-Limit-What
-does-it-really-mean-
As a result, there are two options if you want to use more powerful boxes
with much more RAM in a Citrix / TS environment, either run 64 bit windows
terminal servers, or virtualize with ESX. The customer did not have
applications that would have taken advantage of a 64 bit architecture, so
the only other option was to go with ESX and virtualize for them.
They made the decision on their own to not look at VDI as an alternative
solution...
On Fri, Feb 1, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Malcolm Bruton
<malcolm.bruton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jon
Silly question but why would you just not run the apps natively on the box
instead and isolate instead if you have app co-existence issues? Seems like
you could fit more users on again?
We have taken the decision to use VMWare for small apps (where we can't
isolate) of low user numbers but typically only dev as we don't believe it
scales as well on VMware for heavily used prod servers.
Malcolm
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Jon Luchette
Sent: 01 February 2008 14:53
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: VMware & CPS 4.5
I just set it up for a customer in a production environment: 2 HP DL380 G5
boxes, with dual quad core CPU's and 16 GB RAM, backended with an HP EVA
4000 FC SAN. We have 3 PS 4.5 virtual machines on each host getting 20
users on each vm comfortably. They have a pretty heavy application load too
(Oracle, Lotus Notes, etc...) and they are publishing full desktops to all
users on WYSE SX10 thin clients. We did bring DRS automation down to
manual. All in all, so far so good!
HTH,
-Jon
On Fri, Feb 1, 2008 at 8:40 AM, Chris White <Chris.White@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Thanks for everyone's help/advice on this, most helpful.
Cheers,
Chris
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of TSguy92 Lan
Sent: Thu 31/01/2008 18:34
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: VMware & CPS 4.5
Our current production CTX environment = MPS 4.0, Win2k3 sp2 hosts on VMware
ESX 3.5.
Our standard VM build has 2 procs, 3gb ram and we average about 45+ user
connections per host. Our environment is published app based, which lets us
spread the load around a bit better, no full desktop. Physical boxes running
VMware are HP blades, 16gb ram, 4 proc. Dependant on app load and usage, (we
silo off the heavy use stuff) your mileage may vary.
That link Greg sent has some good recommendations; from my own experience:
- the vmware tools install by default adds a component into user profiles
"hgfs.dat" which can be a pain to deal with. (greg's article covered this).
Sort out how to handle this before allowing users to login.
- Use manual DRS automation if you have a Citrix specific cluster setup in
your ESX environment. Automated DRS vmotion during production hours with
dozens of users connected can hang up a VM.
We have virtual MPS 4.5 boxes in testing, but I can't say we've put any
serious user load on them yet.
HTH
Lan
On Jan 31, 2008 7:07 AM, Kelsey, John <JCKelsey@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
We tried it in an ESX 2.5 environment and the performace was horrible.
Supposedly its been greatly improved in an ESX 3 environment but we haven't
gotten back to try it yet.
*******************************
John C. Kelsey
DuBois Regional Medical Center
*: 814.375.3073
*: <mailto:jckelsey@xxxxxxxx> jckelsey@xxxxxxxx
*******************************
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Chris White
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 08:58
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] VMware & CPS 4.5
Hi,
I've a customer who wants to run CPS 4.5 in a VMware ESX environment. This
will be for production.
Has anyone set this up in a live environment before? I've only ever set it
up for a dev environment. Any tips or recommendations? Should I discourage
them for doing this and use straight tin instead?
Thanks for any help,
Chris.
Basilica Computing Ltd is registered in England, Registered Office Number 1,
Avenue One, Letchworth Business Park, Letchworth Garden City, Hertfordshire,
SG6 2HB, Company Number 2624451, VAT Number 245719348
Confidentiality: This email, sent from Chris.White@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx to
thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on Thu Jan 31 14:01:51 2008 , is confidential and may
contain privileged or copyright information. You may not present this
message to another party without consent from the sender. If you are not
thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx please notify Chris.White@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx and delete this
email and you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking
any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited. 2) Liability: This email is not a binding agreement and does not
conclude an agreement without the express confirmation by the sender's
superior or a director of the Company. 3) Viruses: The Company does not
certify that this email is free of viruses or defects. 4) Requested: The
Company does not consent to its employees sending non-solicited emails which
contravene the law. In the event that you feel this email is such, please
notify the Company in order for the appropriate corrective action to be
taken. 5) Advice: Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely
those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.
Any actions taken on the basis of this email are at the readers own risk. 6)
Other: The sender of this email is expressly required not make any
defamatory statements. Any such communication is contrary to company policy
and outside the scope of the employment of the individual concerned. The
company will not accept any liability in respect of such communication, and
the employee responsible will be personally liable for any damages or other
liability arising.
Basilica Computing Ltd is registered in England, Registered Office Number 1,
Avenue One, Letchworth Business Park, Letchworth Garden City, Hertfordshire,
SG6 2HB, Company Number 2624451, VAT Number 245719348
Confidentiality: This email, sent from Chris.White@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx to
thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on Fri Feb 1 13:44:01 2008 , is confidential and may
contain privileged or copyright information. You may not present this
message to another party without consent from the sender. If you are not
thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx please notify Chris.White@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx and delete this
email and you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking
any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited. 2) Liability: This email is not a binding agreement and does not
conclude an agreement without the express confirmation by the sender's
superior or a director of the Company. 3) Viruses: The Company does not
certify that this email is free of viruses or defects. 4) Requested: The
Company does not consent to its employees sending non-solicited emails which
contravene the law. In the event that you feel this email is such, please
notify the Company in order for the appropriate corrective action to be
taken. 5) Advice: Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely
those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.
Any actions taken on the basis of this email are at the readers own risk. 6)
Other: The sender of this email is expressly required not make any
defamatory statements. Any such communication is contrary to company policy
and outside the scope of the employment of the individual concerned. The
company will not accept any liability in respect of such communication, and
the employee responsible will be personally liable for any damages or other
liability arising.
This e-mail message and any attached files are confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the
intended recipient, any review, use, or distribution of this e-mail message
and any attached files is strictly prohibited.
This communication may contain material protected by Federal privacy
regulations, attorney-client work product, or other privileges. If you have
received this confidential communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by reply e-mail message and permanently delete the original
message. To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to:
postmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx .
If this e-mail message concerns a contract matter, be advised that no
employee or agent is authorized to conclude any binding agreement on behalf
of Orlando Regional Healthcare by e-mail without express written
confirmation by an officer of the corporation. Any views or opinions
presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of Orlando Regional Healthcare.
This e-mail message and any attached files are confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the
intended recipient, any review, use, or distribution of this e-mail message
and any attached files is strictly prohibited.
This communication may contain material protected by Federal privacy
regulations, attorney-client work product, or other privileges. If you have
received this confidential communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by reply e-mail message and permanently delete the original
message. To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to:
postmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx .
If this e-mail message concerns a contract matter, be advised that no
employee or agent is authorized to conclude any binding agreement on behalf
of Orlando Regional Healthcare by e-mail without express written
confirmation by an officer of the corporation. Any views or opinions
presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of Orlando Regional Healthcare.
Other related posts:
