Jump to content
DeployCentral

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'slow'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Windows Deployment
    • SmartDeploy Enterprise
    • General Deployment Discussion
  • Deployment Components & Tools
    • SmartDeploy Imaging Component (SmartWIM)
    • SmartDeploy Virtual Disk Component (SmartVDK)
  • Knowledge Base
    • SmartDeploy Enterprise

Blogs

  • Allen's Blog
  • Smart Image Deployment
  • Devon's Blog
  • Erik's Blog

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 2 results

  1. Hi all, When we are deploying our images across our WAN to multiple computers, it is taking around 6-8 hours per machine to apply the image. I realise this all down to bandwidth, image size (ours is 13GB), etc. but i was wondering if the following would work: We have local servers at each site, and we were wondering if it is possible to copy the image to these local servers and deploy the images that way - saving on bandwidth and allowing for machines to image quicker? I realise this is a long shot, but has anyone else come across this? Hope you can help. Cheers Stephen
  2. While imaging less than 10 computers at a time (sometimes less than 5 computers), we are getting reports from our network infrastructure team that network bandwidth is maxed out and saturated to the point that all users on campus cannot utilize any network assets. We have a 1GB backbone/switches throughout campus and all imaging communication resides on premise inside our DMZ. We usually image via unicast to our WDS server and expect to be able to image up to ~25 without speed issues before going with multicast transmissions, but are still having network speed issues with less than 10 at one time. We have been able to image successfully in the past without speed issues, but we are trying to pinpoint what has changed since then causing our bottle-neck. Our image size has actually decreased in size to 10.4GB. Any input is appreciated.
×
×
  • Create New...