FIM Synchronization Service Performance for Different Topologies

  • Article

Applies To: Forefront Identity Manager, Forefront Identity Manager 2010

One significant difference between MIIS 2003 and the FIM 2010 R2 Synchronization Service is that there is no longer a performance requirement to collocate the synchronization service with its database. For example, consider the following table of results for performing initial migrations of data and incremental synchronizations.

Scale Run type Collocated service and database (hours:minutes) Separated service and database (hours:minutes) Difference

451,253 total objects

  • 79,508 groups

  • 337,929 groups

  • 33,816 contacts

Full import from AD DS

3:10

3:50

18%

Full Sync

6:35

7:22

11%

Export to file through XMA

4:50

5:02

4%

18,639 objects changed

  • 1,045 adds

  • 15,590 updates

  • 1,213 renames

  • 791 renames

Delta import from AD DS

0:51

0:52

Negligible

Delta Sync

1:10

1:06

Negligible

Export to file through XMA

0:47

0:48

Negligible

These results were achieved with a 1-Gigabits-per-second (Gbps) network connection between the FIM 2010 R2 Synchronization Service and its database. These tests showed that using a 1-Gbps network connection was 60 to 70 percent faster than a 100-megabits-per-second (Mbps) connection. You can expect degradation in performance of 25 to 30 percent if a 100-Mbps connection is used instead of a 1-Gbps connection.

See Also

Concepts

Performance Testing FIM Synchronization
Small Profile Performance Testing FIM Synchronization
Medium Profile Performance Testing FIM Synchronization
Performance Testing FIM Service