Virtualized Terminal Services performance

Posted on 2008-06-25
Medium Priority
Last Modified: 2013-11-21
Would the user experience suffer if connecting to a Terminal Services server which itself was running as a Virtualized server?

The Hyper-V supervisor is Win2008x64 Enterprise.
The virtualized Terminal Services server is Win2008x32 Enterprise

Decent iron: Dual 5420 Xeon with 16Gb RAM

Question by:DavidBloom
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
LVL 58

Expert Comment

ID: 21868198
If it's just one user accessing the server, then no - they would be pretty good with all that hardware and software to play with! Having lots of concurrent user sessions active on a virtualised Terminal Server still won't cause any issues, provided you don't go over the usual and recommended limits on CPU and RAM availability. Of course, in that sort of "double-virtualised" environment, continuous monitoring of resources allocated to each VM in Hyper-V is essential.


Author Comment

ID: 21869237
Thanks tigermatt. Yes, common sense and experience would indicate that. But is it true?

Does a virtualized Terminal Server change published capacity expectations? Or for that matter, are there any findings that indicate reduced capacity BECAUSE it's implemented in a virtualized environment?
LVL 58

Accepted Solution

tigermatt earned 2000 total points
ID: 21869323
Yes, common sense is key here. The published requirements for a virtualised Terminal Server aren't going to be any different to a standard TS' requirements. Ultimately, the Terminal Server Virtual Machine is just acting as a standard server installation which is being allocated resources by Hyper-V. It has very little idea it is running in a virtualised environment, and provided you give it the required resources, it won't be a problem.

Obviously, running it on a Hyper-V host machine which is also running 5 SQL Server Database server VMs, your corporate Exchange Server and Domain Controller all on one host is going to be too much.

The rule is to ensure the TS is always allocated enough resources out of the powerful server you have to keep ticking over with all the users it will be running.

Any more questions, let me know. :-)

Industry Leaders: We Want Your Opinion!

We value your feedback.

Take our survey and automatically be enter to win anyone of the following:
Yeti Cooler, Amazon eGift Card, and Movie eGift Card!


Author Comment

ID: 21870161
Awesome. I'll introduce a virtualized RemoteApp server into limited production and see how it goes.

I'll be following up with optimization scenarios in another question. Hope you'll contribute ...

LVL 58

Expert Comment

ID: 21872187
Thanks! Post a link here when you open your other question (to let me know about it) and I'll see what I can do.

Expert Comment

ID: 22008167
David, I'm very interested in knowing how your research and testing went regarding the use of a virtualized terminal server.  I am *especially* interested to know how well it performs when under load.  I had very poor results using Microsoft's previous (non hypervisor) virtualization platform...  Even on very strong hardware, the CPU usage of the TS running under VS2005 was dramatically higher than one would expect after just a few users connected, and more than 5 people or so caused the TS to be virtually unusable.  I'd love to know i Hyper-V fares better.

Author Comment

ID: 22008715
Hi ccpd,

It's been 2 weeks since the "go-live" and I'm only just starting to catch my breath. Here's a summary of sorts recounting my experiences:

Taken strictly from a bandwidth point of view, running a 10-user medical management client\server environment from within a non-hypervised, fully virtualized single Win2008x32 server -- here it is -- PERFORMED MAGNIFICENTLY. The hardware used was not my biggest iron, but a test server based on an Asus P5E with a socket 775 version of the Xeon 5420 (the Q9300 quad-core) and 4Gb (the max) of 800ddr. So basically a phat workstation.

The server CPU, HD and NIC always had headroom under "normal" use. Looked like it would scale upwards to 100 users. There were potential saturation issues with Crystal Reports unless I forced all output query fields within reason, but that could also be resolved by performance "containerizing" the TS sessions with per-session performance percentage locking quotas.

Let me state unequivocally that the virtualized performance was ALMOST ALWAYS FASTER compared to the same client software running as a local install. Especially on the older P4 class systems. Only once in 2 weeks did I hear anything about keystroke lag, but that could have been attributed to a local process interfering with the TS session.

HOWEVER, I have since had to pull back from virtualization. Have done had to rebuild the server as a Win2003x32r2 because of some incompatibilities in the database manager running in the Win2008 (vista) environment. Thus, the next step (while the test server keeps the peace) is to tackle this production solution with a Hypervised Win2008x64 Enterprise Xeon server (ASUS DSBF-DE) running 4 virtualized servers:
1) a Win2003x32r2 runs the database manager (and perhaps other legacy software);
2) a Win2008x32 runs RemoteApp Terminal Services AND the virtualized medical management client software (and perhaps other vista-compliant software);
3) a Win2008x32 runs PDC/AD/DNS/DHCP and other "traditional" single-server services.
4) a Win2008x32 runs IIIS 7 services for TS remote gateway (to keep things secure).

What prevented my from keeping the virtualized server in place were:
+ The database manager not ready for Win2008;
+ TS Easy Print weirdness. Some reports would flat out refuse to print multiple copies. Other report formatting issues on network printers.
+ Need to lock down running only 1 instance of the virtualized software.
+ Nurses and checkout staff yegging about "too many passwords" and other timeout issues. They all hate HIPAA compliance. Too bad.

So ... now that Hyper-V is RTM, methinks I'll be diving into running virtualized apps from within a virtualized server. I have seen the virtualized future, and it (virtually) works.



Expert Comment

ID: 23552522
I am about to enter into a very similar project and trying to hedge my bets. Were you able to build and test the Hypervised Win2008x64 Enterprise Xeon server (ASUS DSBF-DE) running 4 virtualized servers? If so how did it work out. Any other suggestions that will help me get off the ground?

Featured Post

Ransomware-A Revenue Bonanza for Service Providers

Ransomware – malware that gets on your customers’ computers, encrypts their data, and extorts a hefty ransom for the decryption keys – is a surging new threat.  The purpose of this eBook is to educate the reader about ransomware attacks.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

Scenario:  You do full backups to a internal hard drive in either product (SBS or Server 2008).  All goes well for a very long time.  One day, backups begin to fail with a message that the disk is full.  Your disk contains many, many more backups th…
Resolving an irritating Remote Desktop connection that stops your saved credentials from being used.
This tutorial will walk an individual through the steps necessary to configure their installation of BackupExec 2012 to use network shared disk space. Verify that the path to the shared storage is valid and that data can be written to that location:…
This tutorial will walk an individual through the process of transferring the five major, necessary Active Directory Roles, commonly referred to as the FSMO roles to another domain controller. Log onto the new domain controller with a user account t…
Suggested Courses
Course of the Month13 days, 1 hour left to enroll

777 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question