[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [K12OSN] OT: Testing FC10 results



On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 06:05:46PM -0400, David Hopkins wrote:
> >
> > I thought it might be the LDM_DIRECTX setting, but that is set to TRUE by
> > default on Fedora, which means that X traffic isn't encrypted on K12LTSP by
> > default. So it must be something else.  Higher network traffic for some
> > reason, like increased screen resolution or color depth? You said the server
> > has plenty of memory and CPU, and I don't think the disk IO should change
> > that much.
> 
> In terms of bandwidth, this server is performing the same for disk I/O
> as the other servers running 4.2 (measured using netio).  Screen
> resolution is likewise typical.  I could force the color depth to 16
> instead of 24. It is confusing.  I am using ldap for authentication
> and wonder if something changed wrt to how authentication is working,
> or if dns has changed?  The host table is empty for ltsp5?  ltsp4.2
> had an entry for every client.  This is the one difference that I know
> of since the clients are using 172.x.y.z whereas 4.2 used 192.x.y.z.
> I can change this but don't really see why it would have an effect.
> 
There's a possibility that the video driver you're getting with LTSP 5 is not the same as the driver in LTSP 4.2 (in
fact, I think it's likely).  Perhaps the new driver is causing the slowdown.  Do all your thin clients use the same type
of video card, or are they all different?

My working LTSP 5 systems don't put anything special into /etc/hosts like the LTSP 4.2 systems needed.  I'm not sure
why, but it seems it's not needed in LTSP 5.  Maybe it was a remote X thing (bare X, not X over ssh).

-Rob


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]