Adjusting VMware View’s PCoIP for video intense applications
12 comments, 2055 views
Last week a Unidesk customer emailed us asking about poor performance in an Auto-CAD application on a PCoIP thin client. Everything else in the desktop seemed fine except this application. I then received an email from a customer asking how to improve video (like Youtube) in their View/Unidesk environment (when it rains it pours right?).
We knew there were adjustments that could be made to PCoIP to turn down the bandwidth used in low bandwidth situations (turning down the frame rate, limiting the bandwidth, changing default image quality, etc) and assumed that these same settings could probably be “turned up” from the defaults to allow for better video performance… Turns out we were correct.
After finding Andre Leibovici’s (twitter @andreleibovici) article on these settings we began playing with them and doing further research. We then found the View 5 documents on the bandwidth variables and session variables available in the View ADM templates.
But, what we wanted to see was what these settings could improve in something like a full screen video playing back from Youtube. I mean if you just set the settings and see no difference in the video, whats the use?
To test this I recorded my PCoIP session watching the Armageddon trailer on Youtube with the default PCoIP settings. I then re-rerecorded the same desktop with some additional PCoIP “tuning” to see if the video playback got any better.
If you watch the video as it starts (the scene where Ben Affleck is twirling Liv Tyler in the air with a sunset in the background) you can see the default settings make this video look like three of four still frames pieced together. If you then watch that same spot in the modified session you can see it looks ALMOST smooth and is significantly better. (Beware, the sound is the same and without choppiness in both videos. this can throw you off. I was watching without sound and noticed the differences even more)
Default Video:
After recording this I created the following registry keys (which would normally be applied/created via the GPO) and restarted the VM:
HKLM\Software\Policies\Teradici\PCoIP\pcoip_admin
REG_DWORD: pcoip.max_link_rate 900000
REG_DWORD: pcoip.maximum_frame_rate 120
The Max Link Rate entry tells PCoIP how much bandwidth can be consumed. Based on the View 5 guide the default (when nothing is set) is 90,000 Kb or just short of a 100Mb connection. I set this to 900,000 Kb or just shy of my 1Gb connection I had on the LAN.
The Frame Rate (which is defaulted at 30) I adjusted to its maximum of 120.
Modified PCoIP Video
Ok, Ron the video seems better, but will these settings eat more bandwidth?
Yes. So I wouldn’t set this in your gold image unless everyone needed it. Instead I would leverage the ADM template from VMware and apply a policy to only the desktops that A: need higher end/better quality video response, and B: are on a LAN with the available bandwidth.
Are these all the settings or the best settings?
No. I just grabbed the two that seemed to me to have the best changes at impacting video and I tried them. There are more options for tuning PCoIP to increase or decrease bandwidth and video performance. You can check out Andre’s article I mentioned before and I would suggest the View 5 doc also noted above. The View doc will give a detailed description of each available setting and what it does. You can then tune the protocol to your needs.
Ron’s Politically Incorrect VDI Blog
Too many organizations are out there trying to implement VDI and failing. Whether you like what Ron has to say or not, he is here to say what others won’t about VDI and help you get it right in your environment. Get Ron’s advice… raw…unfiltered… without the sugar coating.
 |
Comments
I found the solution already at lenovo.com/cloud. You hit the nail on the head though - do the right think without the user knowing how or what happened. The critical factor is taking advantage of the hardware in the user's hands. As the previous response indicating, if I am using FB on iOS, there probably is an "app" for that. Why not launch it then when using iOS but that same single icon they click on within the web desktop from a regular computer launches the browser and SSO in to FB. All of which solves the end user dilemma users having to think too much. My users are fickle (as most are) and turn away from things that have poor user experiences or force the user to think too much. Once I provided a web desktop and stopped having them think, we found peace and harmony. Interesting transition for us as well, when my windows app vendor started providing a web interface instead, we waited till it was feature parity and switched, yet the users never knew anything about it...they continued to click on their app icon and now see a web service.
Horizon might a good way to stitch it together, can't wait to see what develops. I have made my choices though and don't think I will have to return.
I only use VDI for the most secure of needs and use RDS, App Virt, and local on managed devices for others allowing me to lower costs for operations while driving the trend towards web without having to suffer the end user problem of where is my app now. All of this is integrated into the web desktop.
Anon,
You have good points, and its a great dream... BUT this one line:
" But there are lower cost ways of dealing with it than an all VDI."
Today? To an end user/customer? They need a model now. They struggle with their apps and remote/anywhere access to their apps. And saying its cheaper / lower cost for them to re-write their apps or migrate their data to a new cloud/web based app along with the sunk costs of the existing environments, the retraining of IT staff and what not...
I would have to say there is no "lower cost" way of walking into an environment TODAY and dealing w/ 1000 or 5000 users and all their apps and all their data to give them better access from multiple devices. The project timeline and cost to move ALL those users and their apps to a complete web model TODAY would take years and require huge amounts of capital... And that is if they dedicate to it right now.
Customers need this today, and as other options and products mature and their apps can be replaced gradually at a low cost it will then make sense.
My experience is that business does not ignore the cheaper/lower cost technology because it chooses to. If someone had a Easy button that converted their apps and data and kept the cost the same or lower than VDI, they would buy it.
@Anon - Full disclosure - I work @ VMware - but what you describe is exactly what VMware is hoping to achieve with Horizon. One, common, unified portal/workspace that unifies web/SaaS apps, legacy windows apps, full desktops, and user data/persona with device-specific intelligence to "do the right thing" for the user without them having to think about it or care.
That's what we ALL want - that's what *I* want as a user too.
VMware isn't the only vendor looking to deliver this. I think any of us involved in this space see the need for something like that, a next-generation workspace that moves with us, follows us, and is smart about how best to access the right tool for whatever task we are trying to do.
It's just going to take some time to get there.
So to the Windows apps we go... Your all right, we still have windows apps but we don't only have windows apps, just a part of all the apps that exist. There are also multiple ways to deliver these apps (using a web desktop) where VDI is just one of the choices amongst other techniques. The bigger challenge I face is that I have a mixed bag of use cases - managed, un-managed, and mobile (remote). I want a single interface that works for each situation. The user sees their windows app and in a managed device the web desktop launches it locally if it is there. If it is not there IT can dynamically choose to stream or publish or VDI. But it all stems from one icon for the app. That same scenario applies to any device the user has and where IT can make a dynamic decision at the time the user clicks on the app menu or icon - the decision is founded upon what type of device (OS, Browser) is the user using, what capability does the device have, who is the user and their role, where is the user (inside or outside), the status of the device if possible - battery/power, wired/wireless, RAM, CPU, etc... Wouldn't that be better than relying on VDI which is an expensive choice as a stand alone solution to all the apps. If I only focus on VDI for my windows apps, then my users are stuck with a challenging IT situation for all other apps - in essence I am forcing them to think more which in turn increases my help desk and lowers their productivity. What are we solving for - simplicity for IT or simplicity for users? I get the security of the app and data, we can't avoid this issue. But there are lower cost ways of dealing with it than an all VDI.
Ron has it nailed - VDI is just a bridge - we're all going to have to deal with Windows apps for years to come but VDI let's us give those apps new capabilities (access from anywhere - like a web app) and it also let's us contain and control the deployment of them far better than we have been able to previously.
VDI is just one step on the path to changing the user workspace paradigm.
I do find it ironic that many people today talk about "web apps" and then immediately mention iOS and Android - which basically moves us right back to "thick" apps. Do you use a Facebook app or do you open the browser on your phone/tablet and navigate to facebook.com? Granted, the Facebook app is just a custom front-end to the same web infrastructure but it's a "thick" custom app, and it's unique/different for each OS which is just the kind of thing we were trying to avoid.
We're just getting to the point of being able to standardize on a core OS image, contain and control application deployments and installs, and present a consistent experience for applications across any device - and at the same time we're heading in exactly the opposite direction by using device/OS specific apps to access the exact same data/back-end with inconsistent UIs and capabilities.
This is why I love my job.
I totally agree that all these wonderful new devices are providing all new levels of freedom for computing. For applications that are supportive of those broad platforms, the flexibility of work anywhere is wonderful.
It's interesting that these very non-Windows devices are part of why VDI is gaining traction - because people do want (demand!) to work anywhere. By moving Windows from our single point of computing (our desktop/laptop) into the data center with VDI, we are able to present our applications to any device.
Like Ron said, we have far more apps stuck in the Windows world then people often realize - and it's for good reasons. They are big, and complex, and have deep dependencies on security, databases, integration and more. VDI allows us to bring the freedom of mobile computing to the user while enabling IT to maintain their security and rich integration.
Anon,
it seems you are on a Web kick. If you can get rid of all Windows apps then you are in a happy place. But very few corps or government agencies are anywhere near that. Hell, consultants still run into 16 bit apps in some places, and apps that were written for IE6... so they cant even get rid of the old browser.
But sure, if you can get rid of all your Windows apps, do it. But the reality of that is way far off for almost every org out there.
Will VDI ever solve the use cases we see today - lan, wireless, remote via DSL, Cable, 3G, 4G? It does not appear that a Windows solution will be what we need since more apps are becoming web based and we are adopting more web apps, in fact my windows apps are decreasing year over year. Why would I do VDI again if in the future I have no windows apps to deliver? Windows everywhere can't be the answer if I have most of my users now on iOS and Droid...isn't there another way through only a browser and nothing related to windows? What about a web desktop...
not sure how to contact you....
you can email me direct though. Roglesby at our domain.
Ron- Can you please contact me directly? I'd like to discuss this a bit more and possibly share some material I am currently working on within VMware. Thanks!
I might get a chance to measure the bandwidth and FPS, but at the moment I have some things I am finishing up and am focusing on Unidesk layering stuff :-)
The view desktop was running at 1280x800. the video was a default Youtube video just ran full screen within that session as that is what my second customer was complaining about (video perf within a view session), so I just found a video (that was safe for work) and used it to play with. The original Video from Youtube can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0tFOuCoT8c
Can you give any details on the video and screen size? It looks like you are playing a 360P video at full screen? But what's the desktop resolution set to? Default session bandwidth is 90,000Kbps or 90Mb - which should deliver a much better experience than you are seeing in the "before" clip full screen or not. Bumping up the session limit could help if you can both deliver and decode PCoIP at greater than 90Mb (this can be tough for soft-to-soft to achieve) but the FPS bump probably did nothing as I don't think the software implementation of PCoIP can support 120FPS.
Can you measure bandwidth consumption and FPS for these tests and show what actually changed between the two?
Post new comment