MS Access VERY SLOW via thin client

M

mscertified

Our state agency has recently switched to thin client for many workers. The
users are complaining that the MS Access applications are extremely slow
(20-30 seconds to display a screen from a menu) and screens appear part at a
time. Is this to be expected via thin client and is there anything that can
be done about it? Other non-Access applications seem to be acceptable. The
Access applications are pretty big and complex and cannot be made much
smaller. The biggest one is 18 meg front-end, 110 meg back end with 5
simultaneous users. The database is split and all users have their own MDE
front-end. This is Access 2003.
 
A

Albert D. Kallal

mscertified said:
Our state agency has recently switched to thin client for many workers.
The
users are complaining that the MS Access applications are extremely slow
(20-30 seconds to display a screen from a menu) and screens appear part at
a
time. Is this to be expected via thin client and is there anything that
can
be done about it? Other non-Access applications seem to be acceptable. The
Access applications are pretty big and complex and cannot be made much
smaller. The biggest one is 18 meg front-end, 110 meg back end with 5
simultaneous users. The database is split and all users have their own MDE
front-end. This is Access 2003.

I explain the problem and solution here:

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal//Wan/Wans.html

If you really using thin client (citrix or Windows terminal services, then
access should run very well, in fact better then it did before over the
network because it really a remove desk top system, and access will actually
NOT be running over the network...
 
A

a a r o n . k e m p f

Jet is pig slow.
you don't need a terminal session- what you need is to upsize to SQL
Server and build some proper indexes

Stop making excuses-- so sorry that these kids put you down the wrong
path.
No go and find someone to upsize to SQL, or learn how to upgrade your
lifestyle directly
 
G

Guest

With thin clients, complex screens are slower than simple screens.
Is there anything you can do to make the screen simpler? Even
reducing the bit depth and the number of colors can help. Graded
colors are bad. Get rid of unused menus and borders. And get rid
of the 3D shadow effect on the controls.

(david)
 
P

(PeteCresswell)

Per mscertified:
Our state agency has recently switched to thin client for many workers. The
users are complaining that the MS Access applications are extremely slow
(20-30 seconds to display a screen from a menu) and screens appear part at a
time.

Define "thin client".

I just moved an unacceptably slow MS Access app from UserPC
FrontEnd/LAN Server BackEnd to a Citrix server and the thing runs
at least 300% faster on the Citrix server.

Some of that must be the server's MIPs, but I suspect that much
of it is having the front end and the back end on the same
physical drive with no LAN between them.

Unencumbered by any real knowledge, I'd still have to blurt out
that whatever the server that enables "thin client" is, the
server's config can make or break the deployment.
 
P

(PeteCresswell)

Per Albert D. Kallal:
(citrix or Windows terminal services

What does Citrix have that Windows Terminal Services does not -
in the context of an application with fewer than 10 concurrent
users and deployment within the same LAN?
 
A

Albert D. Kallal

(PeteCresswell) said:
Per Albert D. Kallal:

What does Citrix have that Windows Terminal Services does not -
in the context of an application with fewer than 10 concurrent
users and deployment within the same LAN?

Probably not a lot a difference for just ten users. However citrix does have
better tuning and it does allow some features that allow to work in a
slightly less or lower bandwidth environment. So the advantage if Citrix
might not be the number of users (server load), but in fact that you have
less bandwidth to work with.

Citrix and TS are based on really much the same technology (and, often as
new features come out for citrix...they filter down to TS). The main
advantage of Citrx is that it has better tuning options for contorl of
bandwith. For example you can limit the bandwith used by cut/paste buffer
(local to remote). So, it is a seperate channel that you can throttle. This
can be really impotrant if you have a remote office and they are all SHARING
the same LIMITED bandwith conneciton. Thus, when a user does a big cut paste
then that operation will not swamp the limited bandwidth that the 5 people
in that remove office are sharing. I believe there is also additional tuning
options that you can use with respect to things like sound, and printer
performance.

There's also another interesting feature and citrix that allows local echo
of characters in particular applications before the character actually makes
the roundtrip. This is much like a hybrid half duplix system if you remember
text and using dial up modems. This echo system means when you type the
character in word you will see the character appear RIGHT away instead of
that charcter going up throught the network to the server and then coming
back down the wire. So each keypress has to make a round trip to the
terminal server and back. Citrix allows "local" echo and this feature can
improve the response time of application by quite a bit. In some cases you
have enough bandwidth, but you have what's called a low latency (low latency
simply means that the time for a packet on the network to "respond" or to
"start going" is rather large. A good example is would be a satellite
connection that's fast, but there still a lot of time delay. Even with the
speed of light, it about 1/4 of a second to go up to satellite and back down
to earth. Add a bunch of network stuff, and your delay before you see your
character with full duplex could be 1/2 second, or more. So, you might have
tons of speed, but lots of delay in the system. This echo feature does not
work in all applications, but it works for the most common ones.

I really don't have experience with citrix but I have done some reading on
it in the past and citrix simply has more "tuning" options with regards to
bandwith (and I suppose this would require more experience to set up and run
because of more things that you can set and control).

As I mentioned it's very possible to some of these features of citrix have
moved down into terminal services. You'd probably be best off to ask in a
newsgroup dedicated to terminal services or citrix as to the particular or
significant differences.
 
P

posted_by_anonymous

Anyone who'd make a suggestion like this, with no more information than is
available in this thread is PIG DUMB (maybe not, I may have seen pigs that
are smarter than aaron). He's got a one-track mind for recommending "upsize
to SQL server".

He won't do it, of course, but it would be educational if he would give a
detailed, specific definition of what he thinks "thin client" is, and then
you response with what the actual thin client in your environment really is.

Anony Mous
 
D

David W. Fenton

Citrix and TS are based on really much the same technology

Microsoft licensed Citrix's technology for inclusion with server
versions of Windows (as well as with desktop versions, since the
remote control features that services like GoToMyPC offer are built
on the same technology).

They *are* the same technology. It's just that when you pay extra
for Citrix, you get other features. Whether or not those are worth
the extra $$$ depends on your circumstances. I have nearly all my
clients using WTS and we haven't had any need whatsoever for the
Citrix extensions (even printing was surmountable in the one case
where that was an issue).
 
T

Tony Toews [MVP]

mscertified said:
Our state agency has recently switched to thin client for many workers. The
users are complaining that the MS Access applications are extremely slow
(20-30 seconds to display a screen from a menu) and screens appear part at a
time. Is this to be expected via thin client and is there anything that can
be done about it?

What do you mean "part of a time"? Random individual elements such as
text boxes and combo boxes popping up? Or a bit of the top of the
screen then a bit more lower down and a bit more lower down?
Other non-Access applications seem to be acceptable. The
Access applications are pretty big and complex and cannot be made much
smaller. The biggest one is 18 meg front-end, 110 meg back end with 5
simultaneous users. The database is split and all users have their own MDE
front-end. This is Access 2003.

I would say this has nothing to do with your Access app itself. The
Access installation maybe.

Hmm, where is the FE located? In the users home folder or on the
Terminal Server/Citrix Server or on the file server? If on the users
home folder then that is likely located on a file server local to them
which may be hundreds of miles/kms from the TS/Citrix system. If that
is the case then place the FE MDB/MDE on the TS/Citrix Server or a
file server on the same LAN as the TS/Citrix Server.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
 
G

George Hepworth

IMO, the best way to deal with trolls is to ignore them personally, with one
exception. It is sometimes necessary to post a correction to an inaccurate
or misleading statements.

Otherwise, I think we can safely assume the average poster is smart enough
to figure out who the trolls are all by themselves.

George
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top