none
PeerCache Source Selection Criteria RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi Champs,

    We plan to enable Peer Cache on our Desktop systems, so the goal is they share content on same LAN to other requestors. We have huge no of desktops, and deployments may vary from small size to big sized packages, not necessarily targeting all desktops all the times. We are in dilemma to enable Peer Cache source on "Some Desktops" or "Half of total Desktops" or "All Desktops", as each of which has some or other pros and cons. We like to enable on all desktops so any/every deployment will benefit of it, but worry is, does it generate huge load on MP/Site to prepare/offer list of Package sources to clients, every client, very time package source is requested for... and also increased load on clients to receive/look among huger nos of desktop as their package sources to pick up and get content from ?

    Thanks, 


    Vasu

    Tuesday, September 3, 2019 9:26 AM

All replies

  • First, is there a reason you are not considering BranchCache instead or in combination with Peer Cache?

    Next, the general recommendation is not do all desktops.

    > does it generate huge load on MP/Site to prepare/offer list of Package sources to clients

    No, this shouldn't be a concern at all unless perhaps you did truly enable Peer Caching on all of your clients and there were thousands of them in each boundary group -- even then, this is bread and butter for SQL. It's simply a list of systems sent to the client, a few KB in size. Content requests are based on boundary groups so much of this is simply predetermined. 


    Jason | https://home.configmgrftw.com | @jasonsandys

    Tuesday, September 3, 2019 12:32 PM
  • Hi,

    Enabling Peer cache on all desktops is not always the best approach, you also need to consider the type of content and update frequency deployed in your environment.
    Starting in version 1802, Windows BranchCache is always enabled on deployments, if the distribution point supports it, and it's enabled in client settings, clients use BranchCache.
    I recommend that you consider enabling both the BranchCache and the Peer Cache to make them work well together. The following blog post has a very detailed discussion on this, I hope this is helpful to you:

    https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/swisspfe/2018/01/25/branch-cache-vs-peer-cache/


    Best regards,
    Larry


    Please remember to mark the replies as answers if they help. If you have feedback for TechNet Subscriber Support, contact tnmff@microsoft.com.

    Wednesday, September 4, 2019 8:31 AM
  • Thannks Jason, No particular resons for skipping BranchCache, but Peer Cache being tightly integrated with SCCM, we preferrred it for keeping it controlled with SCCM. What additional benefits you foresee with either BC or "BC with PC" ? Thanks,

    Vasu

    Monday, September 9, 2019 10:09 AM
  • Thanks Larry,

    What limitations of PeerCache will be best addressed by BranchCache or "BC with PC" together ? Also I heard BC runs on its own and no control of SCCM, does it mean some real loss of control when things go bad on networ/SCCM or so ? Unlike PeerCache which is tightly integrated with and controlled by SCCM 

    Thanks, 


    Vasu

    Monday, September 9, 2019 10:12 AM
  • Here's a great comparison: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/swisspfe/2018/01/25/branch-cache-vs-peer-cache/

    If you add a tool like StifleR (from 2Pint Software) then the "small" cons of BranchCahce go away and the pros of Peer Cache are moot.


    Jason | https://home.configmgrftw.com | @jasonsandys

    Monday, September 9, 2019 2:48 PM