Posts made by krisleslie

Running an older version 7.1 and will be looking to move to the latest/greatest build this summer.

• Dual Socket Host

• 128 GB of RAM

• 16 TB of raw storage, using a Raid 10 /w Dell Per H730 (I don't know to make the Xen Server see the added storage, I added 8 TB of storage to my RAID 10 /w help from Dell Technical Support. The storage is "there" but the hypervisor doesn't see the added storage.

• Disks are all spinning rust nearline sas

• VM's are thin provisioned

• Windows and Linux VM's

Ram and CPU aren't overcommitted. Things are working but we are definitely seeing plenty of times where the speed is not where it use to be.

Target needs security along with Sony

I put down 800 MBps per the screen, not 800 mbps.

Dangit

How can I get a better copy added to the post?

Because in my scenario I have one locale and I'm deploying another one tomorrow at our sister site. I'm going to have to purchase hardware either way I look at it.

@dbeato so let me ask a stupid question, how is this hurting your WAN? Or, is this on a separate WAN away from the other part of your network? Keep in mind I'm not a network + guy at all.

When installing a brand new vm, I'll use Windows Server 2016 for instance, if monitoring the installation and you open the Performance tab, under the section for your Disk Performance, it shows clearly that there is a Disk 0 and Disk 3 however it also shows that the speed is roughly 800 Mbps! 2019-03-22_07h38_54.png

So when the VM finishes installing, and I use the DISKSPD from Microsoft to test speed, the speed I get is clearly nowhere near the same ballpark.

Am I wrong for thinking that maybe this "installation" is done mostly in RAM? Cause clearly 1 SSD directly into the SATA Controller doesn't give 800 MBps +. I had to catch myself yesterday because I had a RAID 0 (on my crappy Dell Perc H200) with 2 SSD's and I was assuming the speed it was displaying was from those. It can't be.

So if this is, in fact, using some partitioned off RAM that's cool, but how do I test my disk speed because I've gotten so many weird results I don't know what is or isn't right when it comes to testing virtually the disk speed.


@dbeato said in Ubiquiti NVR Performance Improvement:

@jaredbusch said in Ubiquiti NVR Performance Improvement:

are going up your WAN pipe to the NVR though. how much bandwidth does that take? And what kind of ingust charges are you getting from AWS for it?

Injest is not a problem, outgoing is always what costs in AWS.

@dbeato so to make sure I understand you, you have your NVR installed as a vm on AWS and you use your main WAN to continuously upload to AWS storage correct?

@scottalanmiller ahhh makes sense

Only sucky thing is some of my vendors don't support it yet -_- (i'm looking at you Intuit)

Scott I've been using 2019 for a long time are you serious?

Yea normally for the other company they pay an auditing firm to come in and inspect. But again, even in that case, no tickets/calls to IT for a request and your right I don't want anything else added to the ever-increasing list of stuff.!

Basically I do the same thing, I "host" it for one of our clients as well. I mean yea that's a different service but same thing just a role of responsibility shift for the infrastructure. It's just QB on someone else's hardware and network. That's not really a difference for the QB Online. They just don't want to spend the # I assume for logging properly. I see the benefit of a hybrid offering.

@scottalanmiller we get audited yearly and randomly, it's just that topic has never come up as long as I've been here. They dig through the financials cause it's local, state and nationwide funds but no one has come to IT and ask hey, let me dive in your QB.

I guess with all this coming to light, it depends on the OP and his business. Because if it were me and I'm not having to deal with that particular side of it (audit hell), I'd just stick with online considering the desktop versions still feel circa 1990 and make sure my books are always right. No harm no foul :0)

Scott is there anyone that could in the cloud?

@scottalanmiller in a case like that, I've never had to deal with that from an audit perspective. Auditors never came and asked for that nor for the clients, we manage. I actually usually want them to go all forensic, just never happens. But I agree with you in that having it when not needed vs not having it and need it I'll be bugging them about that and making suggestions for that online. Honestly from an online perspective, that's a small issue that can be fixed very easily since it's an audit trail. They have one in place probably just not up to the standards your talking about which means it's a big gap that can be fixed. I mean they are making $$$ off it why not add it?

@scottalanmiller if it where me, I'd suggest the poster just move to Xero. I played with it and it's definitely got better options for SMB's.

Scott honestly, even at our company, WE don't use Quickbooks to it's potential and we have the enterprise version. It's like the same debate of people crying about using Microsoft Word vs Google Docs. 99% of my staff won't ever write a proper novel, properly structure a document or build it around standards. That 1% that does really only accounts for IT projects that literally require Word or certain features in docs we may get when receiving documents from our state or the government/partners. Very much cheaper and EASIER to just use Google, Quip, Zoho etc.

Like in the case of us, as a non-profit it's a bit of a step-down but that's only due to Intuit. Again, feature for feature, I still have yet to see anything short of reports being the factor that was missing. There isn't a technical limitation and it's faster to iterate the online version than desktop by a big margin. But when we look at Quickbooks for the desktop, the limitations you have are often there and never go away (since the 90's)!

@scottalanmiller it's not 100% equivalent, but it's better in some cases. The only thing most people are losing (which can be created) is reports. Support can help rebuild reports with you on the phone. Easy peasy. One less thing to troubleshoot in the grand scheme of things. QB on a desktop sucks so bad they don't even know why it breaks at times! For the average small business, Quick Books has been the goto app for years and decades. So I totally agree with going to Xero, Wave, and other cloud-first initiatives but getting that wrapped around anyone short of being a millennial is a tough battle. I see very little benefit of a non-web-based version. In this day and age, the api's of those web-based apps work so much for you especially when you have other types of PSA's in place that you want to use. Trying to tie in Quick Books on the desktop to something web-based cost more and is a bit more time-consuming and limited.

I use anydesk, basically same feature set as TeamViewer. Why not move to Quickbooks Online (sounds like he has QB )

https://anydesk.com/en/