Hi
We have a customer running thin client at Faroe Island and the Acurcl is based on our server in Copenhagen, version 9.2.1 and they are complaining about the performance.
Of course it is the connection, and they have a connection with 20 Mbit Down and 10 Mbit up , but a slow ping (around 65 ms). How much does this Ping influence in the performance. I have read about AGS_RECEIVE_BUFFER_SIZE and AGS_SEND_BUFFER_SIZE but I can't se any changes in performance, when I change these settings. Has anybody got similar problems with slow Ping, and how have you optimized your system.
Is it possible to reach a satisfied performance with such a slow Ping ?
Does anybody know a good way to measure performance in a thin client environment ?
Best Regards
Steen
acuthin --ping server-name:port
will give you a dialog of how long acuthin takes to get to the server and back
Hi
We have a customer running thin client at Faroe Island and the Acurcl is based on our server in Copenhagen, version 9.2.1 and they are complaining about the performance.
Of course it is the connection, and they have a connection with 20 Mbit Down and 10 Mbit up , but a slow ping (around 65 ms). How much does this Ping influence in the performance. I have read about AGS_RECEIVE_BUFFER_SIZE and AGS_SEND_BUFFER_SIZE but I can't se any changes in performance, when I change these settings. Has anybody got similar problems with slow Ping, and how have you optimized your system.
Is it possible to reach a satisfied performance with such a slow Ping ?
Does anybody know a good way to measure performance in a thin client environment ?
Best Regards
Steen
AGS_SOCKET_COMPRESS variable can help address this issue. If the
speed of your computer is much higher than the speed of the network, then
the “ZLIB” setting for this variable may work well for you. However, if the
latency caused by compression time is higher than the latency in the network,
you may not gain much. RUNLENGTH compression is faster, but much less
is compressed.
Hi
We have a customer running thin client at Faroe Island and the Acurcl is based on our server in Copenhagen, version 9.2.1 and they are complaining about the performance.
Of course it is the connection, and they have a connection with 20 Mbit Down and 10 Mbit up , but a slow ping (around 65 ms). How much does this Ping influence in the performance. I have read about AGS_RECEIVE_BUFFER_SIZE and AGS_SEND_BUFFER_SIZE but I can't se any changes in performance, when I change these settings. Has anybody got similar problems with slow Ping, and how have you optimized your system.
Is it possible to reach a satisfied performance with such a slow Ping ?
Does anybody know a good way to measure performance in a thin client environment ?
Best Regards
Steen
one more ... community.microfocus.com/.../19948.acuconnect-thin-client-performance.aspx
Hi
We have a customer running thin client at Faroe Island and the Acurcl is based on our server in Copenhagen, version 9.2.1 and they are complaining about the performance.
Of course it is the connection, and they have a connection with 20 Mbit Down and 10 Mbit up , but a slow ping (around 65 ms). How much does this Ping influence in the performance. I have read about AGS_RECEIVE_BUFFER_SIZE and AGS_SEND_BUFFER_SIZE but I can't se any changes in performance, when I change these settings. Has anybody got similar problems with slow Ping, and how have you optimized your system.
Is it possible to reach a satisfied performance with such a slow Ping ?
Does anybody know a good way to measure performance in a thin client environment ?
Best Regards
Steen
Does the ping time change at all when using the ip address versus using the server name? Sometimes the Domain Name Server can slow the exchange down
Hi
We have a customer running thin client at Faroe Island and the Acurcl is based on our server in Copenhagen, version 9.2.1 and they are complaining about the performance.
Of course it is the connection, and they have a connection with 20 Mbit Down and 10 Mbit up , but a slow ping (around 65 ms). How much does this Ping influence in the performance. I have read about AGS_RECEIVE_BUFFER_SIZE and AGS_SEND_BUFFER_SIZE but I can't se any changes in performance, when I change these settings. Has anybody got similar problems with slow Ping, and how have you optimized your system.
Is it possible to reach a satisfied performance with such a slow Ping ?
Does anybody know a good way to measure performance in a thin client environment ?
Best Regards
Steen
Hi Shjerpe
Thanks for your input.
I can't see any difference using the ip adress versus the Server name.
I will try the ZLIB option. But I have a small question. I have a lot of other customers running on the same Acurcl, can I change the ZLIB option only for one port number, or should I make the change in the alias configuration file.
Steen
Hi
We have a customer running thin client at Faroe Island and the Acurcl is based on our server in Copenhagen, version 9.2.1 and they are complaining about the performance.
Of course it is the connection, and they have a connection with 20 Mbit Down and 10 Mbit up , but a slow ping (around 65 ms). How much does this Ping influence in the performance. I have read about AGS_RECEIVE_BUFFER_SIZE and AGS_SEND_BUFFER_SIZE but I can't se any changes in performance, when I change these settings. Has anybody got similar problems with slow Ping, and how have you optimized your system.
Is it possible to reach a satisfied performance with such a slow Ping ?
Does anybody know a good way to measure performance in a thin client environment ?
Best Regards
Steen
Hi
Now I have tried these. I have written
AGS_SOCKET_COMPRESS ZLIB
in my configuration file.
And I have also changed the AGS_SOCKET_COMPRESS in the ACURCL config TAB to ZLIB (the default value was 255). And after these changes I have stopped and started the port. But when I make a debug output file, this line is listed
Set parameter 'AGS_SOCKET_COMPRESS' to 31
I don't know where 31 comes from, do you have any ideas ?
Regards
Steen
Hi
We have a customer running thin client at Faroe Island and the Acurcl is based on our server in Copenhagen, version 9.2.1 and they are complaining about the performance.
Of course it is the connection, and they have a connection with 20 Mbit Down and 10 Mbit up , but a slow ping (around 65 ms). How much does this Ping influence in the performance. I have read about AGS_RECEIVE_BUFFER_SIZE and AGS_SEND_BUFFER_SIZE but I can't se any changes in performance, when I change these settings. Has anybody got similar problems with slow Ping, and how have you optimized your system.
Is it possible to reach a satisfied performance with such a slow Ping ?
Does anybody know a good way to measure performance in a thin client environment ?
Best Regards
Steen
Hi Steen, Yes 31 is the internal number associated with ZLIB. As regards to having this on the default port,I would experiment with this "slow" network on a separate port until you have it resolved and then decide. I don't see how applying it to all would hurt, but I don't want to chance that it affects other customers.
