[NBLUG/talk] thought I'd ask here also - Anyone have any experience with LTSP?

[gandalf at sonic.net]

As I understand it everything is run from the server and the x.window 
video is simply sent to the client. It's rather like running a bunch of 
remote sessions such as with VNC. It's designed for use on low budget 
devices and old systems, 400mhz or so. I'm sure if I could offload some 
of that from the sever to the client the issues would disappear.

On 2015-01-23 16:17, Omar Eljumaily wrote:
> I thought about this a bit more.  I think that it could any of
> several different non-CPU, non-Memory resource issues including:
> 
>  1. Display rendering if it's using hardware (graphics card) to
> render.
>  2. Disk IO
>  3. Network IO
>  4. Network bandwidth.
>  5. Others???
> 
> On 1/23/2015 4:11 PM, Steve S. wrote:
> 
>> Just a sudden thought... might a NIC be mis-set to a slow speed,
>> causing all sorts of funky backups, mis-queueing, context-switching,
>> etc...?
>> 
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Jordan Erickson
>> <jerickson at logicalnetworking.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Can you give us a bit more detail as to your network/server setup?
>>> You
>>> say you're running 24cpus and 128gigs. Might be a logical
>>> explanation to
>>> house NFS on its own server.. What's your network speed? Thin (or
>>> fat)
>>> client specs? Distro?
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jordan
>>> 
>>> On 01/23/2015 03:52 PM, gandalf at sonic.net wrote:
>>>> It's actually a NFS to a separate server. I'm not sure why it
>>> was done
>>>> that way. To me this would probably further congest the network
>>> while
>>>> not being nearly as fast as a high performance direct disk
>>> interface.
>>>> 
>>>> On 2015-01-23 15:00, Omar Eljumaily wrote:
>>>>> Not speaking from experience with LTSP server, but my guess
>>> would be
>>>>> that it is a disk io bottleneck.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/21617500/understanding-load-average-vs-cpu-usage
>>> [1]
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I believe that web browsers cache on disk most of their
>>> content and
>>>>> media before rendering it.  That's a lot of users hitting a
>>> single
>>>>> disk drive or array.  Do you have a large RAID array?  SSD?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Omar
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 1/23/2015 2:19 PM, gandalf at sonic.net wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm seeing very high load averages with low CPU usage. The
>>> two main
>>>>>> culprits are chrome and firefox. I've got about a hundred
>>> users
>>>>>> sharing the LTSP server which has some rich resources (24cpus
>>> and
>>>>>> 128gigs).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> talk mailing list
>>>>>> talk at nblug.org
>>>>>> http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk [2]
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> talk mailing list
>>>>> talk at nblug.org
>>>>> http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk [2]
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> talk mailing list
>>>> talk at nblug.org
>>>> http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk [2]
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> talk mailing list
>>> talk at nblug.org
>>> http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk [2]
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> "When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear
>> of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."      -CS
>> Lewis
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> talk at nblug.org
>> http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk [2]
> 
> 
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/21617500/understanding-load-average-vs-cpu-usage
> [2] http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at nblug.org
> http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk