application optimization question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cool Dude
  • Start date Start date
C

Cool Dude

Guest
Hi,

I've got 3 machines running on the same network, and the behavior just
doesn't make any sense to me. Could anyone explain it?

Machine 1: Server 2003, 1gb -- file server storing access databases and
excel .xla files

Machine 2: Vanilla XP Client, 1 gb ram

Machine 3: Server 2003, 1 gb ram -- terminal server

All in the same room on the same 100mb switched network, so unlikely that
network speed is the deciding factor.

If a user logs onto the XP client, opens excel, runs the add-in, which
accesses the access databases and writes a report, the process runs SLOWER
than that same user logging onto a terminal server session. Screen updates in
Excel (when the report is calculating) are turned off, so unlikely to be that
either. Processors are similar (the Terminal server is slightly faster, but
not enough to explain - I would have thought- the difference).

SO... does Terminal Services cache the data? Is that's what's going on? Or
something similar?

Thanks in Advance,

John
 
Re: application optimization question

More likely it's because the DB and TS boxes are on the same subnet
therefore less travel. As well, you may want more memory in the TS box. A
minimum of 2GB is standard advice.

--
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Services

"Cool Dude" <Cool Dude@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:FF0818DD-BA1A-4DE9-8408-4EE74DC794C0@microsoft.com...
> Hi,
>
> I've got 3 machines running on the same network, and the behavior just
> doesn't make any sense to me. Could anyone explain it?
>
> Machine 1: Server 2003, 1gb -- file server storing access databases and
> excel .xla files
>
> Machine 2: Vanilla XP Client, 1 gb ram
>
> Machine 3: Server 2003, 1 gb ram -- terminal server
>
> All in the same room on the same 100mb switched network, so unlikely that
> network speed is the deciding factor.
>
> If a user logs onto the XP client, opens excel, runs the add-in, which
> accesses the access databases and writes a report, the process runs SLOWER
> than that same user logging onto a terminal server session. Screen updates
> in
> Excel (when the report is calculating) are turned off, so unlikely to be
> that
> either. Processors are similar (the Terminal server is slightly faster,
> but
> not enough to explain - I would have thought- the difference).
>
> SO... does Terminal Services cache the data? Is that's what's going on? Or
> something similar?
>
> Thanks in Advance,
>
> John
 
Back
Top