Perfect!
Thank you very much for your contributions on this issue. As for the noVNC console being a support resource and not a means to spend all day connected, I completely agree. However, in some scenarios such as the installation of servers with a graphical desktop (e.g. windows server), until the minimum setup is completed to activate some remote access protocol (RDP, VNC, etc.), it ends up being a poor quality experience, given the delay generated in the console. Regarding the comparison, accessing the VNC port directly, I'll test it. Thank you for your suggestion. Take care! On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 5:57 AM Nux <[email protected]> wrote: > I think Rohit nails it here with regards to the performance penalty. > > Historically the web console has only been used for basic or recovery > operations, not meant for long term, day to day use. As he suggested RDP > is a much better solution (by miles) and if you're target is Linux then > look at X2Go or FreeNX. > > If you want to measure like for like, then what you can do is connect to > the KVM's VNC port directly using virt-manager or virt-viewer (you'll > need to get the VNC password from the DB and decrypt it). > > > On 2023-11-01 12:37, Rohit Yadav wrote: > > In case you've compared using KVM, by default the noVNC console is > > encrypted by CA framework b/w CPVM and the hypervisor host, which could > > induce some performance pressures. > > > > Also bear in mind you may be comparing: > > > > VM <- Proxmox vnc server -> novnc client in your browser (is this SSl > > enabled?) > > > > versus > > > > VM <- CloudStack KVM host encrypted qemu/vnc server -> vnc-over-TLS -> > > cpvm agent (reverse proxy) -> secured accessed your browser (in case of > > SSL enabled CPVM) > > > > In the latter (case with CloudStack), there is a double > > encryption/decryption that happens on the CPVM side on both sides. > > > > > > Regards. > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Murilo Moura <[email protected]> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2023 16:22 > > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: noVNC performance > > > > Hi Yadav! > > > > > > Yes, I even made this comparison with the same server where I was > > running > > Proxmox before. As for the client, I also accessed it from the same > > source > > that I previously used with Proxmox noVNC. > > > > I have the impression that there is some tuning opportunity that I > > haven't > > found yet, given that the noVNC library is used in both projects > > (Proxmox & > > Cloudstack), but with very different results. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 7:26 AM Rohit Yadav <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Murilo, > >> > >> Have you tested/compared VNC based traffic between CloudStack VMs and > >> proxmox (or others) from the same server and client locations? > >> > >> Depending on your env, if you've a busy console proxy you can try to > >> upgrade the systemvm (CPVM) offering with more CPU (cores and speed) > >> and > >> look at the network setup. > >> > >> You could also explore alternatives, for example if the guest VMs have > >> RDP > >> setup/install such as in case of Windows VMs, you could use a RDP > >> client > >> such as the Microsoft remote desktop app on the client side. In my > >> experience, RDP client with guest VMs have better performance and I/O > >> (webcam, microphone, speaker) than compared with VNC (noVNC). > >> > >> > >> Regards. > >> > >> ________________________________ > >> From: Murilo Moura <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2023 08:23 > >> To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > >> Subject: noVNC performance > >> > >> Is there any instruction to optimize the performance of the graphical > >> console via noVNC? For virtual machines with desktop enabled, the > >> performance of the noVNC console is very low. > >> > >> I came from experience with Proxmox and in it the noVNC console, even > >> protected by SSL, is much superior. That's why I wondered if there was > >> any > >> way of tuning noVNC in ACS. > >> > >> > >> > >> >
