We're trying to relocate our Unix systems from Claremont to Rochester. In the process we encountered serious performance problems, most probably caused by a connectivity bottleneck (we'll be going from a local to a remote host in this process as the users do not move).

We have only a few days to either fix this problem or come up with an alternate approach.

Our question is: What is the minimum and what the maximum bandwidth requirement PER USER for Baan's thin client (bw.exe)?

We'll use this number to compare it with the requirements of Citrix/Metaframe to determine if utilizing this "middleware" would help us get around the connectivity issue. Does anyone at Baan have experience with this product, i. e. if it could potentially increase the performance?

Any input would be appreciated.

Rene

Rene,

For bandwith calculation you should have a look at Baan's latest sizing guide which unfortunately I do not have readily at hand. I think a typical bandwith consuption per user would be between 4-8K.

Citrix will slash your WAN bandwith requirements - don't ask me for figures - by a good bit but you have to balance your gain in networking costs against the setup/maintenance of the Citrix server(s) you would need.

Have you tried contacting Citrix about some figures in relation to Baan environments?

Rene, if you pass on which version you use I can give you some figures out of the sizing guide.

For BaanIV: typical 6Kbps without compression, with compression only half.
For cytrix the say they need 3Kbps per user, if compression is used only 2.5Kbps.

I did get the sizing guide just today. It contains very similar metrics for the connectivity. But thanks for your input!

Watch out when using the numbers from Baan sizing guide. The bandwidth only paints part of the network picture. LATENCY must be considered as well. In a high latency network, like a poorly performing frame relay cloud, Citrix can make a HUGE difference.

The bandwidth numbers can vary hugely depending on the modules in use, batch and report output going down the same pipe.

Here is an example (based upon real-life measurements):

I have a user doing GL or AP transactions. The average bandwidth in use is approximately 8.5-10 Kbps (Baan IV) and the time to run a set of LoadRunner scripts on the local network takes about 4.5 minutes.

When I go to a 300 ms latency network with no bandwidth constraints, the amount of time for the same BW client based transaction set is around 13-14 minutes. In other words it is 3x slower.

With citrix in use, the use of Citrix on the LAN makes it run a little slower than BW. But Citrix over the WAN sees total run time for the test batch being <8 minutes. This is because Citrix is much less latency sensitive than the BW client.

Using a standard ping to measure latency has little value as the default packet size is 56/64 bytes. This will make it through a switched WAn with very little overhead. A larger packet will experience fragmentation that a small packet ping will not detect. And in the example above, the average packet size was 268 bytes.

I have spent a lot of time working on this with a Sniffer to determine actual bandwidth usage for several clients. I hope this information is helpful.

--JimV

I use Citrix for all users who are not on our subnet. We have a mass improvement on performance from all sites including some sites who have slow 64K links and other sales people who have PSTN connections.

BUT Before you go for it check your frame relay CIR/EIR current utilisation and take note of the 6k per user value to make your calculations.

What is your spec for Citrix server hardware and software?

Rosendahl,

Bw interface req.. at least 2.8Kb, but on Citrix Metaframe servers depends of Citrix Band widht protocol and the process that running on aplications servers (a heavy procesor task can make really bad network server responds). I implemented a project with two BaaN Aplication servers, two database servers and three Citrix Metaframe serves with Nfuse, (200 Citrix clients). The tuning was a really dificult part.


If you have any comment, write to javier_riveros@hotmail.com

We have been using citrix here and now we are starting to move over to BW. Not only has performance been better, but the added features have been worth while. Printing to word, excel and outlook. And being able to print to a local printer. Some offices printers are not on the network, but on pc's.

We have had some problems with the citrix server going down (once every six months) and the users can not get on. But the ones with BW get on everytime. Unless we don't have a connection, then it doesn't matter which one you have.