This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

RVDS 3.1 - Low Performance using node-locked license

Note: This was originally posted on 20th June 2013 at http://forums.arm.com

Hello everybody.
[size=2]I'm working with a legacy application that is compiled with RVDS 3.1 build 1021. [/size]
We have an environment with a license server with 6 floating licenses and one client machine that also have a node-locked license.
I supposed that compiling with a node-locked license would give me better performance. But the compilation time is the triple of the time when I use the license server at the same machine.
[size=2]I believe that I have a unknown problem with this node-locked license. [/size]
[size=2]Am I wrong about the performance using node-locked license?[/size]
Is there a way to improve the performance using this node-locked license?
  • Note: This was originally posted on 24th June 2013 at http://forums.arm.com

    The network drives were disabled and the compilation time was reduced to 3 hours.  However, the compilation time using the floating license is 2,5 hours.
    I supposed that using a node-locked license would be faster than the floating license server. Am I wrong?
  • Note: This was originally posted on 24th June 2013 at http://forums.arm.com

    Thanks for your help.
    I'm in contact with ARM's support team but they only have some guesses as you. I'll keep trying to find out what is going wrong.
    In case of new clue please contact me.
  • Note: This was originally posted on 21st June 2013 at http://forums.arm.com

    Is it a time limited license?
    If so, try temporarily disabling any network drives mapped to drive letters.  That worked for me once.
  • Note: This was originally posted on 24th June 2013 at http://forums.arm.com

    My experience is that node-locked licenses are faster.  By how much depends on the network and the loading of the server.  The only times I've had the node-locked be slower (for me) was with the mapped network drives.  Which does seem to have helped in your case.  I would guess (and it is a guess) that must be another similar thing slowing it down in your case.  Have you tried ARM's support team?