Excellent. Excellent! EG-CEL-LENT!!!
Every day this group pays me back in spades for the time I spend wading thru
the messages. Thank - you - all!
It looks like, between Aaron and Jerry, they've put their collective finger
on most of the problem. The users are pulling a million files across into
explorer each time they go into one of those graphics folders. And then
they're saving and sending monster files and documents. And by the way, all
our users' My Documents folders are redirected across the network to a
server, which only exaggerates the problem.
That accounts for the gradual slowing and finally stuck-in-the-mud bandwidth
yesterday. Now to nail this down with some more investigation. But I'm
sure that's it.
Jerry,
Thanks so, so much for sharing your resolutions for this. You guys gave
this some serious thought when it happened to you, and applied some serious
muscle to fix it. Well done.
Man, you guys are good! The demons are as good as gone. (Yeah, I know...
now the real work begins.)
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry W. Rodden [mailto:jrodden@...]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 4:35 PM
To: garyp@...
Subject: Subject: [Vantage] OT - Network Exorcism
I know this problem well. The biggest problem of the jpg explosion that we
had was not so much the jpg files (We recommended to save medium graphics -
files ended up aroun 500KB to max 1 MB in size), but their use in documents,
presentations, etc.
We discovered that it makes a major difference if you copy and paste a
picture in Microsoft applications (Word, Powerpoint, Excell) or if you
"insert a picture from a file".
After testing we discovered that even if the picture was a jpg file of only
500KB in size, if it was copied and pasted in a document, the document file
size would increase by as much as 20 MB for this one picture. If however,
you take the same file and use the "insert picture from a file", choose the
jpg file to insert, it would only increase the file size by 500KB, not 20
MB.
Both Documents looked the same, but one was considerable smaller than the
other.
We have a written policy/ procedure that tells our users that they must use
the "insert picture from a file" procedure when inserting pictures of any
kind into a document. They should do this even if they already have the
picture in the file and they want another copy within the same document,
they must use the "insert a picture from a file" procedure and not succumb
to the copy /paste syndtrome Any documents found that appear to violate this
procedure are subject to quarantine or deletion (i.e. a single page document
that has 4 pictures and is 100MB in size would appear to have violated this
provision).
We also set up a procedure that showed our users how to save their pictures
from the bloated documents as a jpg file, delete the existing picture in the
file and then inserting the jpg file into the document. We gave them a time
limit to convert their documents.
We had documents that were 70 -80 MB in size reduce to 1 to 2 MB in size by
this procedure without compromising the quality of the picture in the
document. We literally picked up GB of space by this process.
When ever any one opened one of these monster files, we got ongoing
complaints about how slow the network was and why couldn't we do anything to
fix it.
We now have far fewer complaints since opening the files only has to take
enough bandwith for one or two MB rather than 70 or 80 MB.
I hope this can help.
Jerry Rodden
Asst. Manager - MIS
Cardington Yutaka Technologies Inc.
575 West Main Street
Cardington, OH 43315-0039
Voice: 419-864-8777 Ext. 209
Fax: 419-864-7771
email: jrodden@...
Every day this group pays me back in spades for the time I spend wading thru
the messages. Thank - you - all!
It looks like, between Aaron and Jerry, they've put their collective finger
on most of the problem. The users are pulling a million files across into
explorer each time they go into one of those graphics folders. And then
they're saving and sending monster files and documents. And by the way, all
our users' My Documents folders are redirected across the network to a
server, which only exaggerates the problem.
That accounts for the gradual slowing and finally stuck-in-the-mud bandwidth
yesterday. Now to nail this down with some more investigation. But I'm
sure that's it.
Jerry,
Thanks so, so much for sharing your resolutions for this. You guys gave
this some serious thought when it happened to you, and applied some serious
muscle to fix it. Well done.
Man, you guys are good! The demons are as good as gone. (Yeah, I know...
now the real work begins.)
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry W. Rodden [mailto:jrodden@...]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 4:35 PM
To: garyp@...
Subject: Subject: [Vantage] OT - Network Exorcism
I know this problem well. The biggest problem of the jpg explosion that we
had was not so much the jpg files (We recommended to save medium graphics -
files ended up aroun 500KB to max 1 MB in size), but their use in documents,
presentations, etc.
We discovered that it makes a major difference if you copy and paste a
picture in Microsoft applications (Word, Powerpoint, Excell) or if you
"insert a picture from a file".
After testing we discovered that even if the picture was a jpg file of only
500KB in size, if it was copied and pasted in a document, the document file
size would increase by as much as 20 MB for this one picture. If however,
you take the same file and use the "insert picture from a file", choose the
jpg file to insert, it would only increase the file size by 500KB, not 20
MB.
Both Documents looked the same, but one was considerable smaller than the
other.
We have a written policy/ procedure that tells our users that they must use
the "insert picture from a file" procedure when inserting pictures of any
kind into a document. They should do this even if they already have the
picture in the file and they want another copy within the same document,
they must use the "insert a picture from a file" procedure and not succumb
to the copy /paste syndtrome Any documents found that appear to violate this
procedure are subject to quarantine or deletion (i.e. a single page document
that has 4 pictures and is 100MB in size would appear to have violated this
provision).
We also set up a procedure that showed our users how to save their pictures
from the bloated documents as a jpg file, delete the existing picture in the
file and then inserting the jpg file into the document. We gave them a time
limit to convert their documents.
We had documents that were 70 -80 MB in size reduce to 1 to 2 MB in size by
this procedure without compromising the quality of the picture in the
document. We literally picked up GB of space by this process.
When ever any one opened one of these monster files, we got ongoing
complaints about how slow the network was and why couldn't we do anything to
fix it.
We now have far fewer complaints since opening the files only has to take
enough bandwith for one or two MB rather than 70 or 80 MB.
I hope this can help.
Jerry Rodden
Asst. Manager - MIS
Cardington Yutaka Technologies Inc.
575 West Main Street
Cardington, OH 43315-0039
Voice: 419-864-8777 Ext. 209
Fax: 419-864-7771
email: jrodden@...