- This topic has 9 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello, NoMachine!
I found strange behavior:
When I connect from NoMachine Enterprise Client 5 to NoMachine Enterprise Server 5 lightweight virtual desktop network consumption are very high on Firefox browsing, up to 2 times more than in virtual desktop with vp8 codec.
I did everything on default installation (didn’t touch nxserver.cfg and nxnode.cfg).
I tried turn on/off all checkboxes on “Display settings” window and move “Performance” slider, but same result.
In same environment Chrome consume lower bandwidth, this is very strange, because as I understand, Firefox uses X11 primitives for draw web page, but Chrome draw webpage as bitmap (https://www.nomachine.com/forums/topic/fonts-chromechromium-nx)
I ran some testcase by browsing in Firefox/Chrome and check network consumption by “ifconfig eth0” output on start and end. So result you can see in attachment.
nx5 server:
Ubuntu 12.04 x86_64 + xfce4
nomachine-enterprise-server-evaluation_5.0.63_2_amd64.deb
Firefox-44
Google Chrome 48
nx5 client:
Ubuntu 12.04 x86 + xfce4
nomachine-enterprise-client_5.0.63_3_i386.deb
Private posts can’t be linked, I’m afraid. I suggest you resubmit showing only the appropriate data about version 5 or 4 software. Thanks 🙂
Thank you Britgirl!
Attachments:
Hi snejok,
we observed a similar behaviour in our labs with the same environement. Firefox seems to actually draw by bitmaps and it is not suprising that the codec (along with the other techniques developed by NoMachine for the new display protocol) performs better in these circumstances.
However we are already working to provide the best experience in lightweight mode even with the graphics-intense drawing performed by some modern applications. In version 5.1 is already implemented https://www.nomachine.com/FR01N03003. Further optimizations will come 😉
Hi, dear fra81!
maybe I don’t understand something about “Firefox draw by bitmaps”, but with nx3.5 client I see that “Firefox draw by X11 primitives”.
Yes, but according to my analysis of the output, those X11 primitives are, by a vast majority, orders to put bitmaps somewhere on the screen. And, as we are comparing NX 5 to the old 3.5, the nxagent 5 exposes many more extensions that were not implemented in the old version. Some of these extensions are there to let applications beautify their output, something they normally achieve by producing X11 primitives that are more XPutImage and more bitmaps.
Dear fra81,
excuse me, maybe i don’t understand again, but you want to say that in default lightweight configuration NX 5 consumes more network than NX 3? are there some options that help me to reduce network in NX 5?
Looking at the statistics it’s easy to verify that NX5 does a better job than NX3, assuming the application is producing the same X11 output. But this doesn’t exclude that two different applications, or even two different versions of the same application, can produce different X11 output, causing, in the end, inferior performance.
A suggestion I can give is to try to disable the Composite extension. This may hint Firefox to draw using different strategies. Just a hint, since I can’t give you any guarantee that this will actually improve the performance. To do that, add the following line to the ‘/usr/NX/etc/node.cfg’:
DisplayAgentExtraOptions “-extension Composite”
This topic was marked as solved, you can't post.