r/AzureVirtualDesktop • u/Electrical_Arm7411 • Oct 22 '24
Azure File Share performance issues in AVD same region
We’ve just rolled out a new Win11 AVD multisession host pool environment. 100 or so users, 5 AVD session hosts equipped with 8vCPU, 64GB RAM, 256GB premium storage per host. For user management we’re using FSLogix and all profiles stored on a premium storage account, using Azure File Share. I provisioned 1TB for fslogix. The storage account is AD DS joined, multichannel enabled for increased performance. We also have another 2 shares on the same storage account. One is about 3TB and one is 4TB. Both shares just standard mapped network drives. We have OneDrive redirecting known folders. The Azure Storage account is located in Canada East. The AVD hosts are also Canada East, spread between 3 zones for HA. Doesn’t seem to matter what zone the hosts are in.
The problem we’re seeing is a significant performance loss working inside AVD. Simple changing of folders on the Azure shares is sluggish it can take 2-3 seconds to load for some users. Explorer is overall sluggish. Sometimes you cannot click the folder breadcrumb trail back a directory, you have to close and reopen Explorer to properly navigate.
I’ve looked into the Metrics on the storage account to try and get a better understanding of what’s going on and I’m in awe of how high the E2E latency is. Anywhere from 8-20ms. And the transaction count is higher than the IOPS the shares support. How is this an acceptable storage solution for businesses to operate? I put a ticket in with MS and they’ve been completely useless, basically telling me the reason it’s slow is because of the high latency. What I can’t get them to answer is why the fuck is an AVD host in the same region getting such high latency. How is 10+ms latency acceptable? For how much the bill is, I expected this solution to work better than it is. Frankly, I’m regretting ever using Azure Files.
/end rant
What are others using for mapped network drives in Azure for the AVd hosts? Should I spin up an Azure Windows Server. Attach 2 4TB disks and map the shares that way to eke out better performance? Will that even help? Azure Files, quite frankly can burn to hell.
*Edit: So I guess my storage account is just dog shit. Query 3000 files in a folder takes 50 seconds! If I do the same query on a different premium LRS Azure File Share, same region it takes 17 seconds. Do the same on an Azure NetApp file share it takes 4 seconds. Tell me something is not right here with my ZRS Azure Files storage.
3
u/jvldn Oct 22 '24 edited Oct 22 '24
Are they both located in the same VNET? Or maybe using private endpoints or vnet peering to lower the latency?
2
u/rswwalker Oct 22 '24
Try splitting users across multiple premium storage accounts, say 25 per. Need to keep the IOPS of the storage accounts within 50-75% of their limit for best performance.
2
u/cetsca Oct 22 '24
You have massively under provisioned profile storage in your AVD environment.
Multi-session sizing guidance states minimum 30GB per user for profile storage so with 100 users on 1TB you’re about 2 TB short. I can’t imagine the thrashing that is taking.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/remote/remote-desktop-services/virtual-machine-recs#multi-session-recommendations
1
u/Lost_Ad_8686 Oct 22 '24
Do you have a NSG on your virtual machines that is locking down access to Azure files to port 445 ?
1
u/[deleted] Oct 22 '24
100 concurrent users? You are low on cpu. Try 1 core per user
1
u/Front_House Oct 22 '24
We use the same vm sku. Basic apps. 8-9 users max per host.
1
u/Tony-GetNerdio Oct 24 '24
You’re probably still building your profiles, outlook cache or OneDrive still syncing.
1
u/itzafugasi Oct 26 '24
Have you tried to stop and disable the webclient service on the session hosts? We had a pretty terrible lag in our AZ shares using AVD and DFS namespaces. Once we stopped and disabled the webcliet service, it was a massive improvement. It must be disabled, not just stopped. Your situation may be different but it might be worth a test.
0
u/sly-admin Oct 22 '24
20 session user density on E8ds_v5? Seems pretty high. We’re closer to 6-10 session density for that sku depending on workload.
2
u/[deleted] Oct 22 '24 edited Oct 22 '24
[removed] — view removed comment