According to a presentation I saw at BriForum by Helge Klein (a man who's opinion I greatly respect), 1 GPO setting 200 items is more efficient than 200 GPOs setting one item each. But obviously harder to troubleshoot, which is where the trade-off is.
If you've got that many GPOs, maybe consider a solution like AppSense or RES which can apply GPOs based on a process starting, rather than the user logon/policy refresh, so Microsoft Word GPOs wouldn't load until the user actually launches Word. Obviously the trade-off here is cost, though. It is possible there's simply an erroneous setting causing havoc though - have you considered using something like LoginVSI, Lakeside SysTrack or the like (of which there are trials available) to see which GPO settings are possibly causing it to run for so long? Cheers, JR From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kelsey, John Sent: 13 August 2015 18:29 To: [email protected] Subject: [NTSysADM] Streamlining GPOs We're seeing significant logon delays due to the high number of GPOs that have to get processed when a user logs in. We're trying to clean up and reduce the number of things that have to happen in order to get the user logged on faster. If we block all GPOs in our testing, we've been able to cut the logon time in half. So either we just have too many GPOs or a couple of them for whatever reason is crushing the logon. Is it more efficient to have 200 GPOs that set 1 item in each one? OR Is it more efficient to have 1 GPO that sets 200 items? OR Does it not make any difference in how long it takes to process? Thanks all. *************************************** John C. Kelsey Penn Highlands DuBois *: 814.375.3073 * : 814.375.4005 *: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> *************************************** [PHH ESig Logo 150dpi] This email and any attached files are sensitive in nature and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of Penn Highlands Healthcare or its affiliates.. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments.
