Updated: Lanmanserver and Lanmanworkstation Tuning - Guest Bloggers - BrianMadden.com
Brian Madden Logo
Your independent source for desktop virtualization, consumerization, and enterprise mobility management.
Guest Bloggers's Blog

Past Articles

Updated: Lanmanserver and Lanmanworkstation Tuning

Written on Feb 19 2007
Filed under: ,
93,113 views, 36 comments


by Michel Roth

Fileserving in Windows environments is usually of critical importance. After all, if you can't reach your files or have to wait five minutes every time you browse a share, the heat starts to build up in the IT department.

File serving is more than just saving a file to your home directory. I wrote a two-part article on MSTerminalServices.org on file serving and Terminal server environments. I suggest you read that article (Part 1 and Part 2 ) first to get a feel for the proper context of this article.

One of the main reasons I wrote that article is that fileserving can easily become a bottleneck if not configured properly, especially in Terminal Server environments.

To solve these performance problems, you sometimes have to tune the fileserver (lanmanserver) and the “fileserver-client” (lanmanworkstation). However, this isn’t for the faint of heart and can cause huge problems if you do it wrong. Unfortunately, documentation on these tuning parameters is rather scarce.

So in this article, I’ll try to explain what the important parameters are, what they do, and how they relate to each other. Once you know this, you'll be able to tune your fileserving environments yourself.

Before we jump into this, please note that there are also a great deal optimizations that you can do in the "Terminal Server Terminal Server Client" hemisphere. Although the basic fileserving principles also apply in that area, this article is not meant to help you perform those optimizations. Also, there is a lot of additional tweaking you can do in other parts of the (Terminal Server) registry. I've purposely left these optimizations out because I wanted this article to focus on the performance of Fileserving components only.

This article was written assuming you’re running Windows 2000 (SP4+) or Windows Server 2003, Service Pack 1.

Core Components

Before we get down and dirty, we need to take a look at the core components that the Windows file serving environment is made of. File serving in Windows is a classic example of a Client-Server mechanism. All you have to do become a file server is to check the box “file and printer sharing for Microsoft networks” in the network connection properties box. On the other end all you have to do to “use” this file server is to check the box “client for Microsoft Networks”.

Both the server and the client components are run as a service. Not surprisingly, this is the "Server" service for the server component and the "Workstation" service for the client components.

Settings for these services are stored in the Windows registry. For the Server service this location is: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\lanmanserver. The corresponding location for the Workstation service is HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\lanmanworkstation.

Lanmanserver

By default, the lanmanserver registry key on a freshly installed Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1 machine looks like this:

The first sub key we encounter is the “AutotunedParameters” key. If you look at it you'll see that it's empty. Don’t worry--it’s supposed to be empty. This registry key exists because, by default, the Server service is auto-tuning. This means that every time the system boots, the server takes a look at the hardware configuration and incorporates any changes in the configuration of the Server service. Changes in hardware that are monitored are the amount of memory and the number of processors. There’s even a formula for it:

(4*(MB*SMBServerPerfSetting)*OSVersion/1)*(#Processors)

where:

MB = Megabytes RAM on the server
SMBServerPerfSetting = .5 if "Minimize Memory Used"
SMBServerPerfSetting = 1 if "Balance"
SMBServerPerfSetting = 2 if "Maximize Throughput for File Sharing"
OSVersion = 2 if running NTServer with > 16MB RAM
#Processors = is the number of processors in the system

In the formula you’ll notice that it refers to the SMBServerPerfSetting. This brings us to the only GUI ‘tool” native to Windows that you can use to “tune” the Server service. When you select the properties of a connection and then select the properties of “file and printer sharing for Microsoft networks”, you should end up with a window like this:

This is where you can optimize the Server service for a specific role. Consequently, if you do the numbers you’ll see that the higher you set the SMBServerPerfSetting, the higher the outcome of the formula is. But what is this number? Good question.

This number represents the value Windows will use for the MaxWorkItems, an important value in tuning the Server service. However, MaxWorkItems is just one of the parameters you can set to tune your fileserver. Let’s take a look at the (registry) values.

Parameters

Before we begin discussing the relevant parameters you can use to tune the Server service you should know that you should create them in the parameters sub key of the lanmanserver registry key. Let’s take look at the most important parameters:

MaxWorkItems

As said, MaxWorkItems isn’t the only thing tuning the Server service. It is one of the most important parameters though. What does this parameter mean? Well, MaxWorkItems specifies the maximum number or work items (receive buffers for file requests) that the Server service is permitted to allocate at one time. If this limit is reached, you get really bad performance out of your file server on even no performance (new connections to the file server are denied).

Possible values: 1-65535

InitWorkItems

This configures the number of work items allocated to a processor during startup. (The "initial" work items.) If this number is too low, it can significantly reduce performance or even deny new connections to the file server.

Possible values: 1-512

MaxMpxCt

This parameter permits a fileserver to provide a suggested maximum number of simultaneous outstanding client requests to itself. During negotiation of the Server Message Block dialect on this initial connection, this value is passed to the client's redirector where the limit on outstanding requests is enforced. A higher value can increase server performance, but requires more use of server work items (MaxWorkItems).

Possible values: 1-65535

MaxWorkItems and MaxMpxCt Relationship

The value for MaxWorkItems must be at least four times as large as that for MaxMpxCt. For example, if MaxMpxCt has a value of 4096, then MaxWorkItems needs to have a value of at least 16384.

MaxRawWorkItems

This value determines the maximum number of raw receive buffers that a server can allocate. If this limit is reached, server performance may be degraded.

Possible values: 1-512

MaxFreeConnections

This value controls the number of free connection blocks that are maintained for each endpoint.

Possible values: 2–4096

MinFreeConnections

This value specifies the minimum number of free connection blocks to be maintained for each endpoint. This setting can sometimes dramatically improve performance.

Possible values: 0–256

SizReqBuf

This specifies the size of a WorkItem (see MaxWorkItems) that the Server service uses. Small WorkItems use less memory, but large WorkItems can improve performance.

When running applications that use a lot of copy or move functions to a remote server (profiles anyone?), the speed at which this function completes is determined by network speed (of course) and by the SMB size. By increasing this WorkItems size, you will allow the server to complete its file copies faster. This will increase the performance of the application making the copy/move calls.

For computers running Windows Server 2003 and with 512 MB or more of physical memory, the default size of the request buffers is 16,644 bytes; for servers with less physical memory, the default size is 4,356 bytes. If this entry is present in the registry, its value overrides the default value.

Possible values: 1-65535

Lanmanworkstation

This key is where all the configuration data for the Workstation service is stored. The lanmanworkstation key by default, looks like this on a freshly installed Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1 machine:

As you can see, there’s no “AutotunedParameters” here. However, there is a "parameters" sub key in which we can do some tuning. It is not uncommon (especially in Terminal Server environments) to have to tune the Workstation service to alleviate performance problems. This is due to the nature of Terminal Servers. My article on MSTerminalServices.org discusses this in detail, but in a nutshell it’s like this: the workstation service was (and is) designed for a single workstation (like your desktop). However, a Terminal Server can easily host 50 desktop sessions, but unless you do manually intervene this server most likely is still configured just as your desktop would be. It’s pretty obvious that this could lead to some performance problems.

Parameters

Although there aren’t that many important parameters like in lanmanserver, there are still a few parameters of the Workstation service you should definitely know about.

MaxCmds

Specifies the maximum number of network control blocks that the redirector can reserve. The value of this entry coincides with the number of execution threads that can be outstanding simultaneously. Increase this value to improve network throughput, especially if you are running applications that perform more than 15 operations simultaneously.

MaxCmds actually serves the same purpose as the MaxMpxCt on the Fileserver. Not surprisingly these two parameters have a special relationship. It’s like this: whenever an SMB session is setup (i.e. a shared file is accessed), the SMB session is negotiated. During this negotiation the Fileserver passes down the value of MaxMpxCt to the client (a Terminal server for example). The client then compares this value to his own MaxCmds value. The lower of the two values then is used to set a maximum on the number of outstanding client requests to the File server.

Possible values: 1-65535

MaxThreads

The MaxThreads specifies how many threads are allowed to run at once. (Each thread allows one outstanding operation.) By increasing this you can increase the amount of simultaneous work. Each extra execution thread will take 1 Kbyte of additional NonPaged pool memory.

Possible values: 1-255

MaxCollectionCount

Specifies the amount of data that must be present in the buffer of the redirector to trigger a write operation. If the amount of data in the buffer meets or exceeds this value, then it is written immediately. Otherwise, it is retained in the buffer until either more data is added or the value of the CollectionTime entry expires.

Possible values: 1-65535

Monitoring

Problems stemming from poor fileserving performance can sometimes be a bit tricky to pinpoint. One way to make sure is by using good ol’ perfmon. The problem with interpreting perfmon counters is that you can never know what the "right" value is unless you have baselined your environment properly. So what to monitor and how to interpret those values is entirely up to you. However, there are some counters you can monitor that I can give some basic tips on. Configure perfmon to monitor the following counters:

Physical Disk

You can measure this on the Terminal Server as well, but you should start at the file server. If the queue length is more than one for a sustained period of time, then your disks are hyperventilating. Give them some air: up your I/O throughput. Look on the software-side: are you paging a lot? (that'll kill your I/O throughput right there) or is your system disk heavily fragmented? Or on the hardware side: buy faster disks (15K SCSI) or upgrade your RAID controller.

Redirector

This is something you should only measure on your Terminal Server(s). You should monitor the "current commands" in the Redirector object. If the value is higher than 20 during sustained periods of time then you could have a bottleneck.

Server Work Queues

The Server Work Queues object should be monitored on the File server. You should monitor the "Available WorkItems" counter. Sustained values smaller than ten mean that the File server is running out of work items. When it does, performance really starts to plummet. Make sure this doesn't happen by upping the MinFreeworkItems value.

Server

In this object there's a counter called "Work Item Shortages". This value represents the number of times no work items were available or couldn't be allocated to service a file request. Obviously if you see any other value than zero, you need to start worrying. Upping the InitWorkItems or MaxWorkItems could help out here.

Again, there's so much more you can monitor but interpreting the results depends heavily on your environment. Just browsing the performance monitor objects I mentioned and playing around with it will give you a lot more information.

Tuning

So what do I set these registry values to? Unfortunately it’s not that simple. For starters, it depends on your specific environment. Also, an unfortunately side effect of almost every one of these registry values is that when they are increased, they consume more kernel memory. Seeing as (the lack of) kernel memory is often a bottleneck in scaling up in Terminal Server environments, you should be very careful in adjusting/creating the registry settings we discussed. If you are not careful, you could end up having more performance problems than you started out with. You need to know why.

Tuning LanManServer and LanManWorkstation in the registry, requires the use of more Non-Paged Pool memory. This can be a real issue on the File Server (LanManServer). Let me briefly explain where Non-Paged pool memory fits into the whole “2GB-Kernel--Memory-Bottleneck-Of-32-Bit-Windows”.

When you have a 32 bit operating system, this means that you have a 32 bit address space. That translates to 4GB of addressable memory space (2 to the power of 32). This 4GB is evenly shared between the user mode and kernel mode. User mode is the memory space that applications run in and kernel mode is used by the system for everything else. This 2 GB kernel mode memory is divided into several areas, amongst which is the NonPaged Pool. Because there’s only 2GB to share, the NonPaged pool gets configured with a maximum size at boot time. By default this is 256 MB. This 256 MB is the area in which you should perform your (LanManServer) tuning.

Why should you worry about this 256 MB? Well, because if the NonPaged pool is depleted then your system usually becomes unresponsive until some NonPaged pool becomes available again. So how does this apply to LanManServer tuning? Well, if you tune LanManServer in such a way that it allocates memory than the NonPaged pool has available and you indeed use up ALL of that allocated memory then you have effectively pushed Windows beyond its limits.

So what should you do? A safe way of doing it is to tune LanManServer in such a way that it can never deplete the NonPaged pool. The amount of memory LanManServer allocates in the NonPaged Pool is primarily determined by two parameters: MaxWorkItems and SizReqBuf. So if you set MaxWorkItems to 8192 and SizReqBuf to 16644 (default) (which in reality is 20480 due to tracking overhead) the amount of memory LanManServer will allocate is (8192 x 20480 bytes) 160 MB. This fits nicely into the 256 MB NonPaged Pool area.
So it basically boils down to this: If you have more than 512 MB of memory in your Terminal Server (which is every Terminal Server on earth and adjacent planets) then SizReqBuf starts out at 16644. This allows you to push the MaxWorkItems value to 8192. If you try higher numbers to create more of these similar sized WorkItems AND your File Servers tries to use these, you run the chance of running out of NonPaged Pool.

So there is however a decent chance that having 8192 WorkItems does not cut it for you. This is when the bits start to hit the fan. If you’re in that rather sad place, you really have only three options, with option 3 being the safest choice:

  • Try making the size of the WorkItems smaller (trough the SizeReqBuf parameter) so you can safely set higher MaxWorkItems values. For example: If you set SizReqBuf lower to 8322 (plus a overhead of 3836 makes 12158 bytes) then this would allow you to have 13800 WorkItems ( 160MB / 12158 bytes).
  • You could even try to up the MaxWorkItems and SizeReqBuf values further with the risk that you run out of NonPagedPool. Now, you should also know that you can tune the Kernel Mode memory in such a way that more memory is allocated to the NonPagedPool. The downside to this is of course is that this memory is taken away from other parts of the Kernel Mode memory. I wouldn’t go there if I were you (unless you’re up there with the likes of Mark Russinovich).
  • Make sure that less Work Items are demanded from the File Server. This is a topic on its own but quick suggestions are: limit folder redirection (especially Application Data) or / and distribute File Services (put for example home directories on one Fileserver and redirected folders on another).

.ADM Templates

I have provided two .adm templates, one for lanmanserver and one for lanmanworkstation. I've separated these purposely because the lanmanserver adm template should be applied to your File Server and the lanmanworkstation adm template should be applied to your Terminal Servers.

Thincomputing.net Lanmanserver Tuning.zip

This template (download) contains all of the Lanmanserver parameters discussed in this article. When you import the ADM template and enable the policy, it will set the following parameters to the maximum recommended, safe values:

  • MaxWorkItems
  • InitWorkItems
  • MaxMpxCt
  • MaxRawWorkItems
  • MaxFreeConnections
  • MinFreeConnections
  • SizReqBuf

These optimizations should applied to your FILESERVER, not your Terminal Server. I've included the possibility to 'undo' the optimizations made the template. You can do this by selecting -Undo Lanmanserver Optimizations- and REBOOTING.

Thincomputing.net Lanmanworkstation Tuning.zip

This template (download) contains all of the discussed Lanmanworkstation parameters in this article. When you import the ADM template and enable the policy, it will set the following parameters to the maximum recommended, safe values:

  • MaxThreads
  • MaxCollectionCount
  • MaxCmds

These optimizations should applied to your TERMINAL SERVER, not your File server. I've included the possibility to 'undo' the optimizations made the template. You can do this by selecting -Undo Lanmanworkstation Optimizations- and REBOOTING.

Final Thoughts

Although some settings have been improved in Windows 2000 and even more in Windows Server 2003, I must say that I’m a bit disappointed that file serving problems like I discussed in the article are still quite common in Terminal Server environments. These problems have been around just as long as Terminal Server has, and one would think these problems would at least be a lot less common, but maybe that’s just my point of view.

Microsoft, finally, recently has published an excellent article which discusses these issues in very good detail. This article isn’t just about Terminal Server environments but it is still the best article Microsoft has ever written on the subject. Bookmark KB317249.
I hope that this document has provided you with enough knowledge to combat file serving performance problems.

There’s however a good chance that these problems with the file serving components of Windows will relatively soon be something of the past or at least be a lot less common. Windows Vista and Longhorn server will incorporate many changes, amongst which are major revisions in the file serving components. For example Vista comes with a major revision of the SMB protocol identified as SMB 2.0. The current protocol (SMB 1.0) was built to support file-serving solutions a couple of decades ago and was based on the assumptions existing then.
These are some of the key enhancements in SMB 2.0:

  • SMB 2.0 supports an arbitrary, extensible way of compounding operations to reduce round trips. This makes the protocol less chatty as compared to SMB 1.0. Chattiness of SMB 1.0 has often been a major pain point.
  • SMB 2.0 supports much larger buffer sizes compared to SMB 1.0.
  • SMB 2.0 greatly grows the restrictive constants in the protocol, so we never need to worry about the protocol itself being the limiting factor for scalability. This includes increasing the number of concurrent open file handles on the server, and the number of shares that a server can share out, among other things.
  • SMB 2.0 supports durable handles that can withstand short network glitches.

All these enhancements in SMB 2.0 will result in better performance and security over LAN and WAN.

Sounds good huh? I’ll believe it when I see it, but the file serving future looks bright!

 
 




Our Books


Comments

Richard Thompson wrote Good Article
on Tue, Jun 13 2006 1:46 AM Link To This Comment
Thanks Brian,
 
I think traditionally a lot of people have managed to find information on tuning the IMA or tuning Terminal services and never really believed their file server needed tuning because of the scarcity of information.
 
Great Article....
 
5 stars from me..
 
Kind Regard
Richard
Guest wrote Interessting !
on Tue, Jun 13 2006 4:03 AM Link To This Comment
Very good handson article. Keep up the good work !
 
Ivo P.
Guest wrote There is nothing to this article
on Tue, Jun 13 2006 10:14 AM Link To This Comment
There is nothing useful about this article. Sure it's point out registry keys, what it's for and it's value.  (I can simply get that from a Microsoft knowledgebase article, and they even have recommended values).  So where is the tuning information?  What are the recommendations?  The pro and cons?  What is the drawback of setting a particular option? (You don't expect to get something for free?)
Guest wrote Thank You
on Fri, Jun 16 2006 6:08 AM Link To This Comment
Great Article! Thank You!
 
5 Stars from me!
Guest wrote MultiUserEnabled SMB Tuning
on Mon, Jun 19 2006 9:10 AM Link To This Comment
If you are going to tune these LANMANSERVER Parameters, also do not forget to configure the MultiUserEnabled value, which is used to negotiate TCP connections on a per Term Session basis instead of on a per Term Server basis.
 
see Microsoft Knowledgebase article regarding configuration and parameters;
 
The Windows Server 2003 redirector component limits the number of files that can be open at the same time to 16,383, even when multiple connections are pooled in DFS

 
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=913835
 
 
subsequently, rad
Guest wrote RE: There is nothing to this article
on Mon, Jun 26 2006 11:43 PM Link To This Comment
I agree. Not usefull at all, like so many articles. Sure, it can be "intellectually" satisfying to dig even deeper in technology, but really, here, we want to share and read "practical" things not only theory.
When i read "... you should be very careful in adjusting/creating the registry settings we discussed. If you are not careful, you could end up having more performance problems than you started out with.", i ask myself: "on which web site am i ?". For 4-5 years school kids, or for IT technicians ?
Last thing: i don't want to be over-certified. Being able to answer that the MinFreeConnections parameter ranges from 0 to 32 and not from 0 to 16 or 0 to 254 is probably usefull for all these M$ or Citrix certifications, but who cares about it in "real life" ? And this article proves it: no tips, no "good" values that should be used in this or this environment. Just knowledge with no practical use.
Michel Roth wrote RE: There is nothing to this article
on Tue, Jun 27 2006 4:55 AM Link To This Comment
I'm sorry to see that the article doesn't live up to the expectations of some of the readers. I tried to point out in the abstract that I was not going to hand everyone the exact values that should be used:
 
"In this article, Michel Roth will explain what the important parameters are, what they do, and how they relate to each other. Once you know this, you're able to tune your fileserving environments yourself."
 
I thought that was clear. Turns out, it's not?
 
Regards,
Michel Roth.
Guest wrote RE: There is nothing to this article
on Tue, Jun 27 2006 8:44 AM Link To This Comment
Michel,
 
Of course, each situation is different and each company has its own environment. So, it's difficult to tell "just to this or that and it's fine tuned". Right.
But, some of us (and you're there) have big experience in the SMB market or with bigger companies. I think it's this experience that is usefull. Let's share "real" situations. Like: "one customer had a fileserver in his ts environment with X GB disk, and Y GB memory, N users doing this and that, etc....; here's how i tuned my parameters: ...... changed this parameter from his default value to P because it allows to better use the cache (or whetever it does), etc. etc.
 
That's what i meant with "pratical" information. With this article, you again show that you have knowledge. Let's turn it into know-how.
 
I apologize if the words used were a bit hard.
 
Yan 
Guest wrote RE: There is nothing to this article
on Thu, Jun 29 2006 11:36 AM Link To This Comment
Apparently you've never hit a situation where tuning these parameters makes the difference between a running system and an unusable system.

Until we tuned MaxWorkItems, MaxCmds and MaxMpxCt, we had major problems with roaming profiles not loading and very long login times due to the fact the workstations couldn't queue up enough requests for network resources.

Had I not known abou these parameters, I couldn't have fixed the problems. Knowledge gives you resources to draw upon. You want cookbook answers, and so I pitty your poor users.
Guest wrote RE: There is nothing to this article
on Sat, Jul 1 2006 3:45 PM Link To This Comment
Completely agree.  Excellent article!
Guest wrote Keep the good work
on Sun, Jul 2 2006 5:17 AM Link To This Comment
Fantastic doc. Very interesting. 5 stars !!!!
Guest wrote This Article is Useful to people who knows
on Thu, Jul 20 2006 7:27 PM Link To This Comment
This Article is Useful for people who has certain level of knowledgements in these areas.
     Many people problably never worked with a Terminal Server, never has problems with slow active directory or thousands problems that maybe occcur in a corporate network.
     For a home user to manipulate these  parameters do not gonna represent any significant difference in performance.
     You have to understand the nature of this articcle and who ones goes directed.
 
Daniel Quintana
Network Administrator
csryback@datafull.com
Guest wrote Parameters
on Wed, Sep 13 2006 9:24 AM Link To This Comment
I was just wondering what are the correct parameters for these settings ? is there somekind of lead or is there somekind of formula which can calculate this for you ?
 
 
Guest wrote RE: There is nothing to this article
on Wed, Sep 27 2006 12:07 PM Link To This Comment
ORIGINAL: Guest

I agree. Not usefull at all, like so many articles. Sure, it can be "intellectually" satisfying to dig even deeper in technology, but really, here, we want to share and read "practical" things not only theory.
When i read "... you should be very careful in adjusting/creating the registry settings we discussed. If you are not careful, you could end up having more performance problems than you started out with.", i ask myself: "on which web site am i ?". For 4-5 years school kids, or for IT technicians ?
Last thing: i don't want to be over-certified. Being able to answer that the MinFreeConnections parameter ranges from 0 to 32 and not from 0 to 16 or 0 to 254 is probably usefull for all these M$ or Citrix certifications, but who cares about it in "real life" ? And this article proves it: no tips, no "good" values that should be used in this or this environment. Just knowledge with no practical use.
nick wrote RE: This Article is Useful to people who knows
on Tue, Feb 13 2007 9:46 PM Link To This Comment
ORIGINAL: Registred User

This Article is Useful for people who has certain level of knowledgements in these areas.
     Many people problably never worked with a Terminal Server, never has problems with slow active directory or thousands problems that maybe occcur in a corporate network.
     For a home user to manipulate these  parameters do not gonna represent any significant difference in performance.
     You have to understand the nature of this articcle and who ones goes directed.
 
Daniel Quintana
Network Administrator

bjorn bats wrote not usefull
on Tue, Feb 20 2007 2:30 AM Link To This Comment
this article isnt usefull at all.
if you have to tune lanman then there is something else wrong.
windows 2003 is intelligent and smart enough these days.
lanman tuning is really nt40 thinking.
 
Bjorn
Stefan Freij wrote Good work!
on Tue, Feb 20 2007 2:41 AM Link To This Comment
Sometimes i get worried when people commenting articles.
Do they work with terminal services or larger enviroments?? even have the competence to comment articles??
Next, Next, Finish installations on any software, OS and then think every thing works fine?!, works when you are a beginner or just for testing
In real world enviroments tuning is necessary
 
Good work Michel!
 
hans straat wrote RE: Good work!
on Tue, Feb 20 2007 3:28 AM Link To This Comment
I think it's a good article. It states clear what you can do to finetune a server in an environment were you have troubles loading roaming profiles etc cause the file server is on it's top of handling workthreads. Sometimes going back to the basics is a step forward in tuning your server environment.
 
Mind that not all engineers are a walking knowledgebase and we are never to old to learn stuf.
 
with kind regards,
Hans Straat
www.datacrash.net
Michel Roth wrote RE: not usefull
on Tue, Feb 20 2007 4:28 AM Link To This Comment
Dear Bjornb,
 
I do not know if I should respond to your comment but I am going to anyway.
The need for LanManServer tuning unfortunately is still very common. This goes for 2003, 2000 as well as NT4.
If you think that LanManServer tuning only was done in NT4 environments then you're lucky. There's even a saying that goes with that: Ignorance is bliss....
 
Kind Regards,
Michel Roth
Thincomputing.net
Citrix God wrote RE: Good work!
on Tue, Feb 20 2007 4:28 AM Link To This Comment
good informative article
bjorn bats wrote RE: not usefull
on Tue, Feb 20 2007 7:20 AM Link To This Comment
well its my opinion, you can accept it , or come with some real arguments instead of personal intimidation.
i am not going to lower myself to personal intimidation.
 
if you have to tune the lanman settings reconsider your design or rescale your servers.
I have tuned lanman several times but it wont give you a BOOST thats worth it.
 
 
 
Michel Roth wrote RE: not usefull
on Tue, Feb 20 2007 8:03 AM Link To This Comment
ORIGINAL: bjornb

well its my opinion, you can accept it , or come with some real arguments instead of personal intimidation.
i am not going to lower myself to personal intimidation.

if you have to tune the lanman settings reconsider your design or rescale your servers.
I have tuned lanman several times but it wont give you a BOOST thats worth it.


 
Dear Bjornb,
 
I am sorry to see that you feel intimidated. Let me rephrase. I think you are just lucky that you have experienced your Windows 2003 environments to be intelligent and smart enough these days.
Also, if you feel that LanManServer tuning won't give you a BOOST thats worth it and you need to reconsider your design or rescale your servers, please share your tips with us!
 
Thanks.
 
Kind Regards,
Michel Roth
Thincomputing.net
Josh Holst wrote To Bad
on Tue, Feb 20 2007 4:00 PM Link To This Comment
It's too bad people can't take the articles for what they are worth.  Either use the article or don't but I see no need in posting negative comments about an article someone obviously spent a good amount of time on to help and educate fellow administrators.
 
Good Work Michel!
Joe McGaugh wrote Good Article
on Wed, Feb 21 2007 6:40 AM Link To This Comment
I think this article holds great merit and people need to take from it what they can, and leave the rest.  I'm in an unfortunate situation where I'm still supporting 2000 Terminal / Citrix servers and fine tuning them like this makes all the difference in the world.  It's quite simple, if the article doesn't pertain to you, move on.  Michel obviously put alot of time and effort into it and the negative postings just take away from the whole purpose of a site like Brian, Jeff, Thomas, Patrick and many others that dedicate their time to help people solve issues without making the costly calls to a 1st tier support person who is only going to escalate the issue anyway.  Great job Michel.  Keep up the hard work..
Jeremy Saunders wrote Great Article
on Tue, Feb 27 2007 9:46 PM Link To This Comment
Great article Michel. This is an excellent reference, and it's disappointing to see the arrogance and negativity with some of the comments provided. Clearly these people have never had to deal with performance issues before, or their environments are just simply not tuned and are therefore running inefficiently. The changes you focus on have made an enormous difference for all my deployments.
 
One thing I would add is something Rick Mack mentioned on another forum in relation to also tuning the lanmanserver service on the Terminal/Citrix Servers themselves..."Peter Ghostine found the same thing actually goes for Citrix and mapped client drives. If you've got a lot of client drive traffic, it can cause hangs because now the TS system is a file server, essentially to itself. Bump up maxmpxct etc on the TS/Citrix system and the hangs go away. That's why my TS server tuning adm template includes the same maxmpxct etc section as the back-end server adm template."
 
I didn't get permission from Rick to add these comments, but I think it adds value to your article.
 
Cheers,
Jeremy Saunders.
 
balroq@gmail.com wrote RE: There is nothing to this article
on Tue, Mar 6 2007 4:02 AM Link To This Comment
Well good that it worked for you, but how did you come to the conclusion that you had to adjust those settings? Thats the kind of information thats missing...
Guest wrote Sizing
on Wed, May 9 2007 5:10 PM Link To This Comment

Thx Michel for this article. I'll read your other posts about FS. It is always interesting reading (and, hopefully,  understanding) new things and how them works.

I was just wondering if you could "size" the need of tuning like that. Does environment with about 25 users per server need workstation tuning? And what about NetAPP things? is there a way to tune them up or do we have to believe they are tuned enought?

 Regards,

FD

Guest wrote 64 bit
on Mon, Jun 4 2007 4:42 AM Link To This Comment
So what about about 64 bit Windows systems? Would using 64bit for the fileserver lower the risk of getting into trouble?
Guest wrote ADM files - not visiable
on Mon, Oct 1 2007 8:03 AM Link To This Comment
Hello Michel, I tried the adm files into my gpo's, but is it true i can't see any configurable setting in the right pane? Or is there something i do wrong? Kind regards Martin Holkamp
Guest wrote Re: To Bad
on Fri, Jan 4 2008 3:37 PM Link To This Comment

You must be one of these oversensitive types; you're totally missing the point. Reader comments are a place to offer constructive critism. To consider that as a "need in posting negative comments" is so lame.

Gee, I hope you don't find this comment too "negative",

AK

Guest wrote ADM links not functioning
on Tue, Mar 25 2008 10:51 PM Link To This Comment

Hi,

 

Was trying to download the ADM templates, not successful..get  404 non found....

Guest wrote Article
on Thu, Apr 24 2008 2:29 PM Link To This Comment

Our Citrix team just deployed 2003 X64 and I just deployed AD 2003 X64 in preparation for 2008.  This article is a very good article for anyone new or advanced.  Much like a car maintenance and tuning can create problems or improvements.  I have done similar tunes on home systems,AD servers, and specialized Media Servers that have very little memory and special application requirements. If your willing to put in the time and effort working on tuning windows you can achieve some amazing results. Thanks for all the effort in the Articles.

  Always remember:

Invoking last known good to undo the changes :P such a life saver. 

Microsoft has given us a base general package, it is up to us to make the most use out of it.

 

Guest wrote More help
on Wed, Apr 30 2008 10:43 PM Link To This Comment

Is it possible to calculate or discover the tuning parameter values ? How can you change a parameter if you don't know what the system is currently using. Could someone create a tool that collected various performance stats and config data specific for File server. Not just the usual taskman or perfmon but something with a bit more inteligience to give meaning and determine possible action.

  • client OS versions;
  • checks for clients requesting 8dot3 names;
  • compares server ram, active services, system config, network configs, service configs;
  • Calculates estimates for page pools, RAM usage depending on current/future settings;
  • Calculates Lanmanserver requirements according to parameters and guides the user;
  • guides benchmarking and monitoring of client use of server eg. profile download at logon, database use, file server use;
  • Advisors changes to server config based on current settings, performance issues found, known optimisations and local testing. 

There is to much to read, too many unknowns (little info from Microsoft and the running OS), too many performance counters to see, too many registry entries to fiddle. There is info describing a setting but not enough about calculating the correct value.

Thanks.

Lord Seaton wrote Still Valid!!
on Tue, Jun 24 2008 6:29 AM Link To This Comment

Is this article still valid in a MS Windows 2003 Server SP2 environment?Thanks in advance.  

(Note: You must be logged in to post a comment.)

If you log in and nothing happens, delete your cookies from BrianMadden.com and try again. Sorry about that, but we had to make a one-time change to the cookie path when we migrated web servers.

Trackbacks

Leadership Development Program wrote Leadership Development Program
on Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:06 PM

One of my all-time favorite quotes about Leadership is from Thomas Edison: \'Hell, there are no rules here -- we\'re trying to accomplish something!\'

Windows Server 2003 File Server Tuning with lanmanserver wrote Windows Server 2003 File Server Tuning with lanmanserver
on Sun, Nov 21 2010 12:48 AM

Pingback from  Windows Server 2003 File Server Tuning with lanmanserver