Issue link: https://insights.oneneck.com/i/1437687
12 Performance EUC performance as measured by end user experience is always a top consideration. Your selected architecture must be able to meet requirements at any phase of the project. This can be a tricky path to walk with some alternatives. If one scales a solution down to meet the minimum starting user requirements, it may end up sacrificing performance if they are unable to scale linearly. Architects do not want to make compromises in the architecture to reach this small starting point that may affect the overall maximum performance options of a solution. If you spend time upfront making the right decision, you can avoid issues later on. An EUC solution design will typically have many different performance requirements. Select an architecture alternative that is flexible enough to meet all performance requirements within a single option. Whether the design will provide several types of EUC services or just focus on app and desktop virtualization, multiple performance needs must be accounted for. Understanding how each alternative will or will not be able to meet individual performance requirements will heavily affect your evaluation and design process. Capacity The capacity discussion is similar to the performance one. There are a number of different capacity requirements within EUC designs that will need to be provided. The solution will call for running server VMs, desktop VMs, applications, user profiles, and user data for this type of architecture. Each layer within the design may have very different capacity requirements. Some use large amounts of data that typically deduplicate well. Other portions, such as user profiles and data, consist of smaller amounts of data per user, but multiplied by thousands of users, turn out to be a large portion in the end. A larger problem in years past was purchasing too much or too little capacity, while trying to achieve the required performance levels. Closely look at architecture alternatives during the design phase to see how they will be able to provide required capacity, while ensuring that minimum performance requirements are also met. The alternative should not provide 2-3x or more capacity to meet storage performance requirements, or add significant additional performance to meet capacity requirements.