GP client/server overhead?

[beleyrs]

was wondering what sort of overhead was added when running gp processes directly on the server versus running on a clinet installation on another machine?

i can run a process that takes 1 minut 15 seconds on the server, but when i run it from the client it is closer to 3 minutes and 30 seconds.

Does that sound excessive?

 

[beleyrs]

oh, and also wanted to mention...

win2000 client to win2003 server
odbc over tcp/ip


anyone using named pipes? does it help?

 

[winthropdc]

Running processes directly on the server will always give better performance to that local client as there is no networking overheads.

However, doing that can also take CPU cycles away from the SQL Server and cause it to slow down for all other users.

If you have big processes you need to run every now and then, using the server out of hours can be the most efficient method.

David Musgrave [MSFT]
Senior Development Consultant
Escalation Engineer
MBS Support - Asia Pacific

Microsoft Business Solutions

http://www.microsoft.com/BusinessSolutions

Any views contained within are my personal views and
not necessarily Microsoft Business Solutions policy.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties,
and confers no rights.

 

[beleyrs]

Thanks David. I agree, but unfortunately we use GP in sort of a strange and illogical way, and most of it is customzied. In fact, most of the processes are long running.

Not responsible for its design, but I am now responsible for supporting it going forward.

My question was more along the lines of what sort of overhead to expect, does a 100% hit seem feasible? Was hoping to get some opinions because i'd like to understand if this is an area for some optimization.