We have had issues with SIMS for a while running slow.
(About 1 minute to launch to the home screen)
We also have had issues with FMS running slow (Sits on checking for updates for about 1 minute and then waits about 15 seconds after you've put in a username and password.)
We bought a new 8 core server with 8gb of ram, etc for the 2008 migration and have just migrated.
We are now finding that SIMS is actually running alot slower...
How do these times compare to your schools? How quickly does SIMS open? If anyone has any idea how to speed things up we would really appreciate it!
Try running the re-index and diagnostic check database patch (6635), it fixed our problems with SIMS running slow after upgrade. Also check your firewall settings on the new server.
Doesn't matter how many cores it has, it's about the speed of the cores.
Did you update the SIMS.INI so the setups directory reflexs the new server?
Can Sims actually utilise multiple cores? I thought the program itself had to be capable of using multiple cores for a CPU to be fully ultilised - hence a program that can only use 4 cores, will run the same speed on a quad core as it would on an eight core.
Which bit? The server bit is SQL based, so it uses as many as SQL can use. Remember express is limited to one and you can only have 1 file per core. For example Core 1 - SIMS.MDF, core 2 - SIMS.LDF etc. It isn't a SIMS thing, it's a microsoft thing.
The SIMS Application bit, ie the client, no idea, be a good idea however, to have 2 cores, one for OS, one for SIMS.
we have the same issuie here although after the 2008 migration it is a bit faster i could use some tips also
Originally Posted by matt40k
Can you please elaborate on what we should be looking at in regards to the sims.ini file i.e. what to change etc?
Thanks in advance,
On each SIMS workstation if you go:
Start | Run | type sims.ini [enter]
Under [Setup] you'll find:
SIMSSetupsDirectory=[PATH TO YOUR SIMS SERVER\SETUPS DIRECTORY]
Make sure it is correct, it might be worth changing it to an IP on the off chance someone has messed about with the DNS (putting a entry in the machines host file).
Also check the connect.ini (located normally in C:\program files\sims\sims .net)
It must NEVER contain both a line reading REDIRECT or Servername and databasename. It's one or the other.
Personally I don't like redirect, it creates too much extra work. On paper it makes it easier if you move servers. But really have CNAMEs and DFS would be better.
If you need to change the connect.ini and the sims.ini you can use SOLUS3 (which is currently avalible to everyone) to push out the new settings.
I have also previously modified the RM Environment MSI, so it deploys the updated connect.ini and the sims.ini. PM me anyone wants a copy.
Also might want to stop and disable the SQL2005 service.
Here are my times. I did an initial run of SIMS and then closed it and did a subsequent run. As you can see once SIMS has been loaded into RAM on the end it is very very quick to open. (Workstation speed drastically affects SIMS start up times so what workstation are you running this on???)
Admin Network: Initially 17 Seconds / subsequent runs 4.0 seconds (Core 2 Duo 2.66 / 2GB RAM/ 7200rpm)
Curriculum Network: Initially 14.7 seconds / subsequent runs 4.0 seconds (Core 2 Quad 2.66 / 4GB RAM/ 10000rpm)
It does sound like you have network / server issues.
From experience 2008 should be quicker in both express and standard edition, and in some cases it really gets a move on. If Sims is still on the 2005 then you can flick between the databases and compare speeds. Does it work quickly on the server?
Originally Posted by ect
Certain configurations of RAID can also have a detrimental impact on speed with the data being spread over multiple disks.
Moving to mirrored drives and even separating the MDF and LDf can help with this.
Is anyone out there is running the SIMS Server on Solid State Disks? If so has it made a big difference or not?
With SSD I'd expect to see vastly better read / access times but perhaps slower write access on big lumps of data, it's probably quite expensive too.
Still would go with more RAM, if it's loaded in RAM it's going to be tons faster then mucking about with splitting the ldf from mdf. Still like you say RAID can affect it, make sure you have large amounts of cache, most onboard(zero) don't have cache which affects the performance greatly.