GPP Drive map and logon impact

Question

Hello,
GPP drive mapping requires synchronous processing which cause slower logon time. But it seems after reading this article here http://blogs.technet.com/b/grouppolicy/archive/2013/05/23/group-policy-and-logon-impact.aspx  that if you
don't modify the GPP drive mapping after it has been applied, for every other logon, policies will be process asynchronously resulting faster logon. This is not what I experiment, even if I don't modify the GPP, every two logon, policies are
process synchronously
Here another way to improve logon time when using GPP drive map :
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/12221.troubleshooting-the-drive-maps-preference-extension-in-group-policy-replace-mode-only-maps-the-drive-every-other-logon.aspx?wa=wsignin1.0
... The reconnect option is the same as mapping a drive using the /PERSISTENT attribute. This allows the state of the mapped drive to be saved between user logon sessions.  In this solution, use Create action to map a drive that persists between user
logons. This would allow for faster logons because
Group Policy wouldn’t be forced to run synchronously every logon cycle.
Same here, even if I set the persistence attribute, every two logon, policies are processed synchronously.
Are those both articles given wrong information or do I miss something?
Thank you for your help.
Chris

Answer 1

>
http://blogs.technet.com/b/grouppolicy/archive/2013/05/23/group-policy-and-logon-impact.aspx
This article is misleading in terms of foreground/background/sync/async.
I tend to say we have two processing modes only: sync and async. sync
can only occur at startup/logon, and it only occurs if several other
conditions are met (these conditions are correct in the above blog
post). sync in my terms is identical to foreground, and async is
identical to background :)
So the question still is: Do you have any policy settings in place that
might force the next processing to be sync?
Martin
Mal ein
GUTES Buch über GPOs lesen?
NO THEY ARE NOT EVIL, if you know what you are doing:
Good or bad GPOs?
And if IT bothers me - coke bottle design refreshment :))