[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ltsp-discuss
Subject:    Re: [Ltsp-discuss] Firefox almost useless, SSH highly CPU intensive
From:       Steven Spencer <steven.spencer () kdsi ! com>
Date:       2017-11-09 14:30:45
Message-ID: b83bddb2-cf55-52ec-3e4d-6c9dc0528829 () kdsi ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 11/09/2017 05:52 AM, Rolf-Werner Eilert wrote:
> Am 09.11.2017 11:53, schrieb Mgr. Peter Tuharsky:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> this year I realised, that it is almost impossible to use Firefox on
>> older thin client, and I'm speaking about usual pages, not Youtube HD
>> video. If I open several tabs, it simply freezes the whole desktop for
>> long minutes. Running top on the thin client local console, I see, that
>> ssh eats 100% of CPU. Of course the desktop is forzen! OTOH, the server
>> has no problem.
>>
>> The client is a notebook with 2GB RAM and old generation Core2Duo CPU,
>> namely Intel T7200. Not new, but not that bad either. At least I would
>> assume that this should do (for years I have been using much weaker hw
>> with great success). Desktop apps run alright, the machine even runs
>> AstroMenace 3D game well as local app, but the remote Firefox is a
>> problem (Yes, I know the web IS a problem, but to such extent?).
>> A newer machine with newer generation of CPU works much better, almost
>> as before.
>>
>> The second option is to run Firefox as thin client local app. It works,
>> but the response is very slow, far from comfort on the 2GB Core2Duo. So
>> I'm getting to a point where it is almost impossible to run Firefox on
>> that machine.
>>
>> Does somebody have experience and solution for this?
>>
>> I suspect that the difference is in AES acceleration support on the
>> newer thin client CPU. I know, that last years the cryptography has been
>> scrutinised and stronger ciphers prevail. Bud do they consume CPU so
>> intensively that ssh is overloaded and simply cannot cope with remote
>> desktop session?
>>
>
> You should deactivate ssh for thin clients.
>
> IMHO this overload is due to the way graphics elements are handled by
> later versions of all software building packages, including those that
> make Firefox etc.
>
> It seems instead of sending single root elements of pictures from the
> server to the client, whole pages consisting of pixels are made and
> the result sent. That means, for every tab in Firefox, a complete
> "photo" is sent, and when you scroll the page, it would have to be
> sent over and over again. The same is true for nearly all GUI elements
> which have reacted more and more slowly on our thin clients in the
> last years.
>
> Currently, I am still working on a thin client network with much
> weaker clients than you have. We have no ssh running, but for about 2
> years it has slowed down tremendously.
>
> That is why I plan to switch to fat clients, which in our case would
> mean to buy all new hardware. I have the first 4 clients running in
> test operation, and students are very satisfied with them.
>
> Prior to starting, I tested the new hardware as thin clients, but it
> didn't come up to fat client mode by far.
>
> Regards
> Rolf
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _____________________________________________________________________
> Ltsp-discuss mailing list.   To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
>      https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss
> For additional LTSP help,   try #ltsp channel on irc.freenode.net
>
Peter,

I'd have to agree with Rolf here. We actually use LTSP in a business
environment and last year rolled out our first fat-client setup. It is
orders of magnitude faster in almost every case, but the downside is
that the client, not the server, need to have the concentration of
resources. That means a larger investment in hardware. That doesn't mean
that you can't use older hardware (used gear) in a fat-client
environment though. It just means that in sourcing that equipment you
need to have better CPU, RAM and hard-disk requirements.

I could suggest trying a lighter-weigh browser, but in all honesty, the
content is more than likely the problem-not the browser.

Good luck!

-- 
-- 
Steven G. Spencer, Network Administrator
KSC Corporate - The Kelly Supply Family of Companies
Office 308-382-8764 Ext. 1131
Mobile 402-765-8010 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_____________________________________________________________________
Ltsp-discuss mailing list.   To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
      https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss
For additional LTSP help,   try #ltsp channel on irc.freenode.net

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]