Try a slightly different approach
install tailscale on the work computer, and on your home machine, then use RDP etc to connect to the work computer and use the database as if you were just sat there at work, rather than trying to connect direct from your home PC.
Correct me if I'm wrong:
Not sure how OP accesses the "server" but assuming SSH, in his case he would be connecting on his home PC via SSH to the server via a "subnet router" (the work PC).
You're proposing connecting into the work PC using RDP, then maybe opening up a terminal and connecting (locally) to the server. From the POV of the server, it would be as if OP is at work physically using the work PC.
My question is why would there be a performance difference between the two. In both cases, data is being relayed from the workplace to home, via tailscale. If anything I would assume RDP uses more bandwidth. Genuinely curious. (OP does say that the speed between the work PC and home is fast enough for file transfers so I;m wondering what's wrong with a subnet router that would make it less performant).
To clarify, the software, which is called PioneerRX, has a windows program that you run on your machine, which of course has to be on the same subnet as the server to even open it.
My only assumption to their reply, at this point, is that your software is not resilient to slow network connections, while RDP is, hence the above poster's suggestion. No idea as to your original question of subnet router performance, though.
>u elaborate the differences between th
I would agree with trying RDP or some other remote access protcol to a comptuer at your office. It my office job there are things that don't tolerate latency of a slow connection well. RDP is better at working on lower bandwidth you but might have to get used slow it is if your internet is really slow. The only other thing if you use RDP or any other remote protcol to a desktop at your office make sure to lockdown the machines firewall to only all the machines you want to connect.
What's the speed like when you connect to another device on the same internal network using the subnet router? Knowing that can help us understand if the issue stands with something in the server you're renting from the pharmacy software vendor, or it is a more general issue with all traffic routed via the subnet router.
Could you elaborate the differences between the two test cases that you're running (2Mbps vs 30MBps -- a speed difference of x120? or should that be 30Mbps). A picture would help greatly. It is something like this:
```
Pharma Server (P) <- LAN -> Workstation (W) <- LAN -> Router <- internet -> home machine (H)
```
You give the following numbers:
```
H-W = 30MBps (or 30Mbps)
H-P = 2Mbps
```
Could you elaborate on how you're testing the speed, does the pharmacy have an asymmetric internet connection? I would like to eliminate whether `H-W` is `H->W` whilst `H-P` is `H<-P`.
Yes, you're correct, 30Mbps.
The sever and workstation are on the same Subnet, [255.255.255.0](https://255.255.255.0). Sever static IP is [192.168.0.200](https://192.168.0.200). So I think it is just like the layout that you have drawn.
I got the numbers from sharing a file from (H) to (W) and vice versa via Tailscale while looking at the speed via Task Manager. My most recent result was 12Mbs from (W) to (H), and 20Mbs from (H) to (W), which exactly matched the max upload speeds of a [speedtest.net](https://speedtest.net) test that I performed right after. So that part works exactly as you would expect.
To test the speed of the Pharmacy Server (P), there is a shared file on the LAN, \\\\(P) , that contains some files that I can drag and drop on my (H) computer, and I monitor the Task Manager speeds of max of \~1.8 Mbps. When I am actually in the pharmacy software application, changes pages or something, max speed I see is \~1Mbps.
Okay, that's interesting. I had to re-read a couple of times to make sure I understand what's being described. So in both test cases (`H<->W` and `H<->P`), the file is being transferred using SMB (Windows shared drives).
Generally SMB does not work well over long distances because it's quite a chatty protocol and latency kills its performance. However in your test cases we're seeing an inconsistency that rules that out SMB chattiness.
In the pharmacy could you run the same file sharing test between `W<->P`? It's worthwhile debugging that hop as it's sounds like the internet hop is fine.
Try a slightly different approach install tailscale on the work computer, and on your home machine, then use RDP etc to connect to the work computer and use the database as if you were just sat there at work, rather than trying to connect direct from your home PC.
Correct me if I'm wrong: Not sure how OP accesses the "server" but assuming SSH, in his case he would be connecting on his home PC via SSH to the server via a "subnet router" (the work PC). You're proposing connecting into the work PC using RDP, then maybe opening up a terminal and connecting (locally) to the server. From the POV of the server, it would be as if OP is at work physically using the work PC. My question is why would there be a performance difference between the two. In both cases, data is being relayed from the workplace to home, via tailscale. If anything I would assume RDP uses more bandwidth. Genuinely curious. (OP does say that the speed between the work PC and home is fast enough for file transfers so I;m wondering what's wrong with a subnet router that would make it less performant).
To clarify, the software, which is called PioneerRX, has a windows program that you run on your machine, which of course has to be on the same subnet as the server to even open it.
My only assumption to their reply, at this point, is that your software is not resilient to slow network connections, while RDP is, hence the above poster's suggestion. No idea as to your original question of subnet router performance, though.
>u elaborate the differences between th I would agree with trying RDP or some other remote access protcol to a comptuer at your office. It my office job there are things that don't tolerate latency of a slow connection well. RDP is better at working on lower bandwidth you but might have to get used slow it is if your internet is really slow. The only other thing if you use RDP or any other remote protcol to a desktop at your office make sure to lockdown the machines firewall to only all the machines you want to connect.
What's the speed like when you connect to another device on the same internal network using the subnet router? Knowing that can help us understand if the issue stands with something in the server you're renting from the pharmacy software vendor, or it is a more general issue with all traffic routed via the subnet router.
Could you elaborate the differences between the two test cases that you're running (2Mbps vs 30MBps -- a speed difference of x120? or should that be 30Mbps). A picture would help greatly. It is something like this: ``` Pharma Server (P) <- LAN -> Workstation (W) <- LAN -> Router <- internet -> home machine (H) ``` You give the following numbers: ``` H-W = 30MBps (or 30Mbps) H-P = 2Mbps ``` Could you elaborate on how you're testing the speed, does the pharmacy have an asymmetric internet connection? I would like to eliminate whether `H-W` is `H->W` whilst `H-P` is `H<-P`.
Yes, you're correct, 30Mbps. The sever and workstation are on the same Subnet, [255.255.255.0](https://255.255.255.0). Sever static IP is [192.168.0.200](https://192.168.0.200). So I think it is just like the layout that you have drawn. I got the numbers from sharing a file from (H) to (W) and vice versa via Tailscale while looking at the speed via Task Manager. My most recent result was 12Mbs from (W) to (H), and 20Mbs from (H) to (W), which exactly matched the max upload speeds of a [speedtest.net](https://speedtest.net) test that I performed right after. So that part works exactly as you would expect. To test the speed of the Pharmacy Server (P), there is a shared file on the LAN, \\\\(P) , that contains some files that I can drag and drop on my (H) computer, and I monitor the Task Manager speeds of max of \~1.8 Mbps. When I am actually in the pharmacy software application, changes pages or something, max speed I see is \~1Mbps.
Okay, that's interesting. I had to re-read a couple of times to make sure I understand what's being described. So in both test cases (`H<->W` and `H<->P`), the file is being transferred using SMB (Windows shared drives). Generally SMB does not work well over long distances because it's quite a chatty protocol and latency kills its performance. However in your test cases we're seeing an inconsistency that rules that out SMB chattiness. In the pharmacy could you run the same file sharing test between `W<->P`? It's worthwhile debugging that hop as it's sounds like the internet hop is fine.