I have just been informed by a client that he has changed his dialup network access to a Virtual Private network via router at both ends, and now expects AREV to be running faster, but it is not.

This is his configuration:

Main office:

Peer-to-Per network

1 Dedicated PC with Arev & Data

3 Workstation PCs with Arev access

All PCs are running Win98SE

Remote Office

Arev and programs on local pc

VPN access to Data at Main Office

Running WinXP

What changes could be made that would be pretty well guaranteed to speed things up. Or what configuration checks\changes should be made.

Thx,

Barry

Citrix!

Bottleneck is gonna be down to linespeed, the authentication and access method won't make much odds if the linespeed is still dialup level. Unless he gets some form of thin client or remote control such as Citrix/Terminal Services or even PC Anywhere he isn't going to get much improvement without actually upgrading his line speeds.

If VPN is running via Internet for example how is he connecting to Internet? Maybe needs to at least consider broadband but Citrix/remote control is best solution IMHO

Tony

Sorry, VPN is running over the Internet, I assumed VPN was internet

Barry

Yep most often will be but the key thing here is how each end is connecting to the Internet. You say a router so I suspect it is broadband now rather than a modem dialup? If that is the case then one would expect speed to improve but it still depends on things like line contention, VPN overheard etc. Unless you have very fast internet connections trying to pull LH data over the Internet is still going to be slow.

Hence suggestion of using a thin client where only screen and keystroke info is transmitted rather than actual data. But Citrix is expensive so maybe a remote control package like PC Anywhere of VNC may be better.

Tony

I experienced a similar issue. I could not even get AREV to load over a dial up connection. When I moved to broadband and VPN, AREV opened but was slow. We have recently started deploying our application through a CITRIX gateway and it runs great. It is just like I am at work. I would suggest (as Tony mentions) that you try and move to a thin client method to deploy AREV outside of the hosting institution.

If the Peer-to-Peer network was changed to a Client/Server running small business server and W2000 LH Service, would that speed up the remote PC access.

Very likely as then only the data would be transmitted not the entire frames…

[email protected]

The Sprezzatura Group Web Site

World Leaders in all things RevSoft

Is the difference between a select running with LH Service and without LH service, that the "selecting" is done on the server and not the pc.

Can LH Service run on a XP PRO PC (acting as server but being used as a pc) that is running a windows network (peer-to-peer) and still service requests the same as if running on a Server software PC.

We've successfully done this.

Currently the service does not do backend reduction but how it cuts down on i/o is simply this. When you want to write say a 500 byte row back to a table which is in overflow without the service, your workstation will request the frame it hashes to and then work through each frame to append the new/changed row. If this causes an expansion your work station will have to read additional frames to redistribute the data. So this could EASILY result in 10 1K frames being read/written across the network to update one 500 byte row. With the service the workstation sends a command to the service "write these 500 bytes" and that's all that travels on the wire, the rest is done on the server.

[email protected]

The Sprezzatura Group Web Site

World Leaders in all things RevSoft

Bloody fantastic, Thanks!!

View this thread on the forum...