application optimization question

[Guest Cool Dude]

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

[Guest Jeff Pitsch]

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