2001-to-WF1-to-WF2 Performance Drop-Off

[gespino]

ALL,


Has any one else run into issues with performance problems with ProEngineer WF2.0? Specifically, at start-up, when the opening of files, and general slow performance.


We've recently upgraded from WF1 to WF2 (end of December) and the drop-off in performance and stability (to some extent) has dropped off dramatically. Certainly slower and less stable than Pro2001. It seems that all our problems are on our Windows2000/XP platform. Our UNIX platform seems to be pretty solid, performance and stability.


Our basic configuration on NT is:


Windows 2000 or XP (Professional), 1.8GHZ to 3.2GHZ, 512MB-to-1GB memory, SCSI or SATA disks on all of our machines. I know about the 512MB memory, we're planning on bumping those machines to 1GB or replace them altogether, but we still have the same problem with brand new machines that have 1GB of memory.


We also operate WF2.0 on Intralink 3.3 (M021)... This seems to be a source of pain.


If anyone has suggestions, please share the knowledge (config's, networking adjustments, OS performance hacks, etc). We've already looked at quite a few things but I don't mind getting repeat information... You never know, we may have over-looked something....


FYI - We're seriously thinking of going back to UNIX (Solaris 9 on Sun Blades 1500/2500), because it has gotten to an "unacceptable level".


THANKS IN ADVANCE...!!!

 

[Moroso]

I've been on WF 2.0 for 10 months, absolutely no slow downs from 2001 or stability issues to speak off.


I'm doing Mold Design, Mechanism Design, Advanced Surfacing, iges cleanup, Drawings etc ..., the only slow down I've experienced is my own fault of trying to select composite curves and copying surfaces, the way of picking vs. 2001 way of picking to me is less desirable.


Stability is using first pointed to the Video card, then with virtual memory if you working on huge assemblies.


I'm working on a Pentium IV 3.4 ghz 3 gigs ram and a Quadro 980XGL video card, Op sys in Win XP Pro for 3 months and Win 2000 SP4 for 7 months on WF 2.0.

 

[Israr]

I agree with Moroso. We are using Wildfire 2.0 with great success. We switched over from 2001 and it took us only 2 weeks to get the rythm.


Wildfire 2.0 works tremendous on Windows 2003 server. Windows XP SP2 slows it down so we uninstalled SP2 on those machines.


Israr

 

[Moroso]

Israr,


That's really good to know about SP 2 slowing it down. i have SP 2 loaded on my new machine but haven't noticed any real performance lag, you did noticea difference from 2001 to WF 2.0 using the same machine. I haven't used 2001 on this machine in a heavy capacity.


Thanks


Brian

 

[gespino]

Are any of you guys (Israr & Moroso) running WF2 with Intralink? It seems that's where we experience the majority of slow downs, as well as startup, when opening files.


Have you used any performance enhancing config's in your config.pro?


We've since implemented the following config's to help with performance and have seen some improvements:


- regen_using_backup_disk=no, systems_colors_file=<path_to_a_colors_file_with_no_blende d_background>, spin_rate_sensitive=yes, fast_highlight=yes, instance_search_exhaustive=no, use_temp_dir_for_inst=yes,nt_cache_dir=yes, dir_cache_max=400


All ProEngineer & ProIntralink software is local to the workstations, and trail files are written locally. The only thing that is on our network drives are the User Home Directories/Drives and Standard ProE/ProI configuration files.


In terms of graphics, most of our workstations have Quadro 980XGL video cards.


- Thanks for the reply... I will also be looking at the virtual memory as you suggested (Moroso)...


THANKS!

 

[dr_gallup]

Are you sure trail files are getting written locally? Writing them across a network is a real performance killer. Also, having user home directories on network drives might be a problem (I doubt it), Pro is going to look there for config.pro and config.win files but only when it starts. XP in general is slower then 2000, I don't know about SP2.

 

[Moroso]

No Gespino, we are not using Intralink. From past experience anytime you read and write across a network it's definitely going to have implecations like the good Dr. said.& nbsp;

= network
Edited by: Moroso

 

[[email protected]]

If you are using build M070 of WF2 with Intralink you need to download
patches or just update to a newer build. M070 is documented with having
slow performance with Pro/INTRALINK.

 

[gespino]

Thanks provan,


We did upgrade to M080 when we learned about the speed issue. It seems as if it is still not fixed OR there is something else causing this.


Most of my users report that WF2 is okay outside of Intralink (with exception to a slow startup of Pro) but we've recently had issues with Intralink/ProWF2 sessions. We've also had Intralink issues as well, so I'm suspecting that it is the Intralink clients that are at the root of our problem...

We are planning on kicking off testing of M090, which was recently made available.


THANKS!

 

[rserafin]

Gespino,


We're using both WF2 & Intralink 3.3. We have problems with people not cleaning up their WS's on a regular basis. You need to make sure that the local.ddb file located in the .proi folder isn't getting too big. Generally once it get's past 150MB the machine will slow down considerably. The path to that folder & file is <working dir>\.proi\local.ddb. You need to check everything in then get rid of the WS's, exit WF2 & Ilink then delete the local.ddb file. That will speed things up. You can also use the utility called ldbcompact.bat Run that from a C:\ prompt. Example ldbcompact D:\prowork\.proi\local.ddb That will "defrag" the local.ddb if you don't want (or can't) to get rid of the WS's. That must be run before starting Ilink & WF2. Hope this helps.





Rich

 

[wskunz]

We gave up on running any machines with less than 2 GB RAM, especially if you are running Ilink.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" />


3.3 M021 & 3.4 require double the RAM of previous versions. Afterupgrading to 3.4we saw a 30-80% increase in speed of Ilink related operations over early 3.3 releases.


Bill

 

[gespino]

Thanks wskunz!


That's a huge help... We will probably pursue the same memory move you've made. Although we won't be going to Intralink 3.4 because we will be implementingPDM-Link (Windchill) to replace Intralink...


YOUR INPUT CONFIRMS MY SUSPICIONS ABOUT ILINK 3.3! We've had nothing but problems since moving to 3.3 from 3.2


THANKS AGAIN!!!

 

[Israr]

WF 2.0 M090 and Intralink 3.4 M010 are working excellent better than ever.


Once again I would say SP2 upgrade on XP slows down performance.


Israr

 

[Israr]

Gespino,


"PDM-Link (Windchill) to replace Intralink"


Why do you decide to do that. This may be of interest to many others like me.


Israr

 

[gespino]

Our busniess objective is to implement an enterprise-class PDM and project management tool that will give us the capability to better share our designs to the downstream extended enterprise. This includes collaboration andvisualization in a project management environment.


We know that PTC has made big improvements withWindchill 7.x, in terms of managing ProEngineer objects. We expect it to get even better. Intralink helps us manage ProE data effectively but not efficiently, if that makes any sense... My company has a very old and antiquated part numbering and revision system that makes Intralink very cumbersome for managing and tracking change history. We feel that PDM-Link will allow us to better manage change and track change history. But we realize that there are some trade-off's in terms of managing ProE attributes, but we feel the "slight" trade-off between PDM-Link and Intralink will be well worth it. Again there has been a great improvement from Windchill 6.x to 7.x. We would have never made the decision to make this move pre-Windchill 7.x


Hope that helps explain... As you might imagine, there is a lot more involved with the decision but that will hopefully give you an idea of what wasour thought process.


THANKS!!!

 

[wskunz]

Gespino,


I am glad the info was of some help.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><O></O>


We are implementing PDMLink right now, but will continue to use Ilink with the Gateway for some undetermined transitional period.<O></O>


The user migration tools for PDMLink will not be available until Rev 8, until then migration is only possible through Global Services, and we will not pay that fee - $$$$$.


Good Luck,


Bill
Edited by: wskunz

 

[gespino]

wskunz,


You're absolutely right... Currently with v7.x of Windchill, PTC Global Services is the only option for migrating from Intralink and they don't come cheap...


As we speak, we are actually going through the process of reviewing the SOW with PTC and determining whether or not we want to pay for this service. They (PTC) also set this up as a "catch-22" in that they don't discuss the extra cost of their migration tool. So this is still under negotation. The only thing that is compelling us to push for this, is the fact that we are lacking in so many other aspects of PLM, not just CAD data management. Otherwise I think we make the same strategic decision you guys made.


The next couple of weeks should determine our next decision and move...

 

[NielsC]

wskunz - i thought the 2gb memory need was primarily
for the server not for the workstations. Does it make a major
improvement on the workstation??



BR NielsC

 

[wskunz]

We started with 2GB RAM for our workstations long before the additional need by the new Ilink. We saw great performance improvements with 2GB in the early days of 3.x. Now with the latest versions of WF2 and Ilink I believe there is no other option. We have just begun modifying our XP systems to allow 3GB of total memory and have seen some performance improvements.

Our servers are 4 processor machines with 4GB RAM

Bill
Edited by: wskunz

 

[rserafin]

Bill,


Most people don't realize that Ilink requires triple the memory of a stand-alone session of WF2. Of course it depends on the size of the files you're trying to open. I regularly open assy's containing 1K-3K parts and I use every bit of 1.5-2.0 GB of memory depending on the simplified rep.





Rich