Axapta 3.0 over remote links

Hi,

I currently have 150 users running axapta 3.0 sp4 at our head office, this year we have aquired some remote sites and are in the process of going live with Axapta at these sites.

At the moment our remote users are logging into the head office via terminal services and this is ok however the ammount of bandwidth required is alittle excessive and performance isn’t that great, is there any methods for improving performance for remote users?

I have limited TS users to 256 colours etc, but things like the background image that aren’t needed are just wasting bandwidth. It’s quite depressing coming from a background of text based ERP solutions that were extremely quick remotely to Axapta where speed in general is pretty slow.

Are you running in a 2-tier environment?

If so, you might consider switching to a 3-tier solution and then using thin client connections from remote locations.

I think it will work much faster than over a TS connection.

And it won’t be 256 colors only.

The only disadvantage is the need to install a MBS Axapta Client on each remote location.

If this is not acceptible, than maybe the Enterprise Portal can be used. In this case all the users will need is a web-browser.

Yes we are running a 2-tier enviroment, I much perher the idea of moving to AOS + 3-tier. I was already looking at rolling out thin clients.

When you say disadvantage is the need for a local Axapta Client, you mean have it running at each remote site locally and talk directly to AOS via our Private Network right?

I raised doing it this way with our current Axapta partner who really really didn’t like the idea of me doing this saying it was dangerous to Axapta. I still don’t quite see how, I don’t really think our partner is upto supporting the level we’ve gotten too.

I also like the idea of using the Enterprise Portal, but think it’ll be ecconomically unviable, considering we’ve spent something like 3 Mil AUD on Axapta since 2.5 and I think management want to see abit more return on the software we currently have, not to mention the upgrade from 2.5 to 3 was abit of a disarster from what i was told, I’ve only been the IT Manager here for 4 months so it predates my time.

Hi!

I would stay at Terminal Services and not switch to AOS connections (unless you have a REALLY fast network connection). I have never seen an Axapta installation (and I have seen some…) that really worked with AOS over a long distance. Usually, you should have latency times less the 50ms, then it might be okay.

You can test the latency by pinging your Axapta Server from a remote client. That’s one way.
You can also test the Axapta latency with an Axapta built in tool. I have described it in my blog here: http://axaptafreak.blogspot.com/2005/07/testing-aos-latency.html

So, just for the test, connect an Axapta 2-tier client from your remote system to Axapta and measure it…

the connectivity between my sites are all under 50ms via our private network and I am doubling the badwidth this week… The other reason I’d like to get away from Terminal Services as it’ll fix a problem I have with the intergated Eft POS mod we’ve created for Axapta that currently hates TS.

Is there a reason why the VAR we currently have states there is no advantage to use AOS? Haven’t Microsoft dropped the Tier 2 model with Ax 4.0? and what would their logic be you think for saying it’s dangerous to have Axapta connecting to the DB server directly over the WAN when no one else I’ve spoken to about it has been very concerned at the idea.

I’m looking for a solid and scalable model that lets us progress into the future, and I don’t seems to be getting much assistance from our VAR who charges us like a wounded bull.

by the end of the year I’ll have 150 local users and 60 remote users over 3 external sites, and need to know Axapta performace will be exceptable and all the testing I have done so far with 5 remote users via Terminal services really leaves me to believe that it won’t be up to the job using the 2 Tier with TS model.

I’ve even considered adding local DB servers to each site and replicating the data between all the servers but this doesn’t seem much like a suitable solution even though it would do the job.