Comments for Jarian Gibson

Comment on Using EdgeSight with Provisioned XenApp Servers by Jarian Gibson

Jarian Gibson — Fri, 18 May 2012 20:35:43 +0000

Will this be the same disk used for write cache or any other persistent data like event logs, stream cache, etc?

Comment on Using EdgeSight with Provisioned XenApp Servers by Josh Lindemann

Josh Lindemann — Fri, 18 May 2012 20:32:38 +0000

I guess I’m curious as well, since it works with XenDesktp, if you used a UNC path on the XenApp Server agent could that work?
Perhaps a share with a folder for each xenapp server?
ie:path = \\servername\share\%computername%

This way it could be stored on the Edgesight server and reduce the need to create multiple persistent drives.

Thoughts?

Comment on Using EdgeSight with Provisioned XenApp Servers by Josh Lindemann

Josh Lindemann — Fri, 18 May 2012 16:46:57 +0000

so what size are yours typically? Just trying to figure out a range to work with. I don’t want to give it 100GB if its only going to use 2-5GB.

Comment on Using EdgeSight with Provisioned XenApp Servers by Jarian Gibson

Jarian Gibson — Fri, 18 May 2012 16:44:54 +0000

For XenApp and EdgeSight you will need to have a persistent drive. This can be the write cache drive if using write cache on target device hard drive. Watch your storage performance when doing this. EdgeSight can and will have extra performance overhead. As far as size it depends what all data you are putting on the persistent drive.

Comment on Using EdgeSight with Provisioned XenApp Servers by iPadU

iPadU — Fri, 18 May 2012 16:26:47 +0000

We just took the master xenapp image (in private mode) and installed the edgesight agent, and re-packaged the image for deployment. We are finding that some xenapp hosts do check in with the Edgesight server, but then some that were there disappear again afterwards.
Do you have to have a persistent drive attached or could you map to a network share instead? Or would that cause overwriting issues?
If I do need to have a persistent drive attached to each XenApp PV’d server, what size do they need to be?

Comment on XenDesktop Remote PC Feature by Bill H

Bill H — Mon, 14 May 2012 19:37:23 +0000

I should correct that and say “biggest hold-backs to rolling out VDI is…”. This is not unique to only XenDesktop. Any VDI solution requires additional infrastructure.

Comment on XenDesktop Remote PC Feature by Bill H

Bill H — Mon, 14 May 2012 19:36:07 +0000

Great summary of the new feature. I am most excited about this feature coming out of Synergy. To me one of the biggest hold-backs to rolling out XenDesktop is the amount of infrastructure (servers, storage, networking, etc) needed. Now for a telework solutioni, the VDA can simply be loaded on everyone’s desktop.

Good stuff.

Comment on XenDesktop Remote PC Feature by Prince

Prince — Thu, 10 May 2012 20:30:57 +0000

Thanks for sharing…I just wish Citrix would stop releasing a product that does not require a fix or feature pack every other minute

Comment on Using XenDesktop 5 with VMware by Shaker

Shaker — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 21:28:39 +0000

Dude, you made it so easy… thank you! I remember hacking some proxy/policy file before to convert things to http. This is a proper and elegant solution.

Comment on Provisioning Services 6 Black Screen Issue by Uday Raval

Uday Raval — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:07:29 +0000

Fix #1 seems to work like a charm, except that I have to apply these changes again to the vDisk if I’ve brought up the master using the vdisk in private mode and then change again to standard mode.