Title: | DECWINDOWS 26-JAN-89 to 29-NOV-90 |
Notice: | See 1639.0 for VMS V5.3 kit; 2043.0 for 5.4 IFT kit |
Moderator: | STAR::VATNE |
Created: | Mon Oct 30 1989 |
Last Modified: | Mon Dec 31 1990 |
Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Number of topics: | 3726 |
Total number of notes: | 19516 |
Posted also in the notesfile below: <<< VAXWRK::$1$DUS6:[NOTES$LIBRARY]VMSNOTES.NOTE;1 >>> -< VAX/VMS and more! *** FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY ***. >- ================================================================================ Note 1984.0 X-Terminal/VAXstation Load on Client??? No replies DPDMAI::STEINER 34 lines 11-JUL-1990 16:53 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Is anyone in the VMS Performance and Test Systems Engineering working on general guidelines for Client Load Characterization for X-Terminals and Workstations (User Guidelines)? We have read the internal report by John Buford and some articles in DR magazine and are involved in a raging customer debate over cost per seat in an DECwindows environment. The question is... "What is a more cost effective solution to a DECwindows application in image display from a DECwindows client to multiple DECwindow servers?" Is it a large Client with X-Terminals, or is it a smaller Client with low end VAXstations. The VUP and memory requirements on a client are substantial! And if very little interaction from the user is required at the display end, is the cost per seat for usage of the client resources more expensive with a 6000 class client than on low end VAXstations? As observed in a user test environment, the CPU requirements on display startup are between 18 and 24 percent of a VS3100 per window. Each window requires a new process on the client and if many servers are active, a bottleneck results, with corresponding delays on the X-Session display. Can we expect a display server process on the X-Client for multiple head display on the X-Server? And would we be correct to assume a reduction in load on the Client Processor and by how much? I realise that it is difficult to estimate the requirements generically, without applications specific data, but this is exactly what customers want for budgeting cost of systems. Any experience of others in the field?, or in Engineering? Phil
T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3067.1 | An ounce of data is worth a pound of theory... | VMSDEV::BUFORD | Lay on, MacDuff... | Wed Jul 18 1990 12:25 | 35 |
It has been a while since I worked in this area, but since you asked, here goes... To the best of my knowlege, no one in the VMS Engineering space is characterizing X-Terminals or the load which they put on the remote systems (VMS, Ultrix, etc.). I cannot say whether the X-Terminal development team is doing this sort of analysis. (I can't even remember the name of the organization because it has changed once or twice since I did the report that you read.) Unfortunately, I doubt that there is an easy answer to your question today. General guidelines depend on being able to characterize the type of work that the user does. You mentioned that you read my report; please study Appendix A *carefully*, particularly the description of the applications and operations. If your customer's users do different tasks (I guarantee that they do) then the resource usage figures will differ. By how much? Nobody knows... Here is a wonderful opportunity for someone to do Digital and its customers are tremendous service: go to a representative sample of our DECwindows customer sites and collect data on user work habits (which apps are running, where are the apps running, which apps are being used actively, how often does the user switch from actively using one app to another, how often does the user start and stop apps, does this pattern change with the time-of-day?) and system resource usage data (what is the CPU utilization, how much memory is being used, is the memory shared or local, how many users are actually sharing sharable pages, how much I/O is being performed, what does that I/O represent e.g. X protocol, remote page faults, remote locking protocol, application specific I/O?). Until we can characterize how users actually use DECwindows, lab generated "guidelines" are just a shot in the dark... | |||||
3067.2 | See OLDTMR::SECG$REPORTS | WINDY::SHARON | Sharon Starkston | Thu Jul 19 1990 15:52 | 11 |
While not as all encompassing as one would like, there are two papers out of the LES Systems Engineering System Characterization Group you can look at to get some feeling for host load. WINDY>dir oldtmr::secg$reports:vt*.ps Directory OLDTMR::DISK8:[SECG.REPORTS] VT1000_REPORT.PS;1 VT1000_WHITE_PAPER.PS;1 |