[Freeswitch-users] Freeswitch performance as a redirecting server
Dmitry Kadantsev
kadantsev.d at gmail.com
Wed Aug 26 04:53:45 PDT 2009
Hi all,
is there same situation with FS for Windows? I mean 64bit is more preferable
than 32bit, isn't it?
Any performance test on Win 32/64 were done?
--
Best regards,
Dmitry Kadantsev
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Tihomir Culjaga <tculjaga at gmail.com>wrote:
> intanto e il centos che si sta installando :)
>
> grazie.
>
> T.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Giovanni Maruzzelli <gmaruzz at celliax.org
> > wrote:
>
>> netbook remix
>>
>>
>> joking! Server 64bit :-)
>>
>> -gm
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Tihomir Culjaga<tculjaga at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Giovanny,
>> >
>> > regarding ubuntu, did you mean 8.04 server or desktop ?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Giovanni Maruzzelli <
>> gmaruzz at celliax.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Definitely go for 64 bit OS.
>> >>
>> >> If you want to be safe and sure, go for CentOS 5.2 64bit. Is the one
>> >> used both for development and for heavy duty production.
>> >>
>> >> Also Ubuntu 8.04 is good.
>> >>
>> >> Other versions/distros are less used by the community.
>> >>
>> >> Adding RAM and CPUs helps to scale up.
>> >>
>> >> -gm
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Sincerely,
>> >>
>> >> Giovanni Maruzzelli
>> >> Cell : +39-347-2665618
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Tihomir Culjaga<tculjaga at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hey Giovanni,
>> >> >
>> >> > thanks for the tip... indeed the db files were heavily used
>> regardless
>> >> > if i
>> >> > started freeswitch with nosql option (freeswitch -nosql)... FS was
>> not
>> >> > writing anything into that files ... instead it was just accessing
>> >> > it....
>> >> > This behaviour leads to a waste of 40% CPU time... waiting for other
>> >> > processes (mainly disk access) to finish!!!
>> >> >
>> >> > I moved freeswitch/db/ to a ramdisk and the performance got a boost
>> to
>> >> > 140
>> >> > CPS with a CPU load of 80%. I was keeping the machine for a while (20
>> -
>> >> > 30
>> >> > minutes) on that rate when i sow CPU suddenly went to 100% and FS
>> >> > becoming
>> >> > irresponsive :).
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > What can be wrong?
>> >> > What are the limits in CPU usage (50%, 60%, 70%, 80%...) we should
>> not
>> >> > cross?
>> >> > What fine tuning do we need in order to asure a long high load run?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Also, I'm running 32-bit OS (debian 5) on a 64 bit CPU... does it
>> have
>> >> > sense
>> >> > to move my OS to 64 bit? ... will FS gain more preformance ?... I
>> mean
>> >> > will
>> >> > FS perofomr drastically better 20%+ ?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Tihomir.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Giovanni Maruzzelli
>> >> > <gmaruzz at celliax.org>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Maybe your load comes from disk access?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Try putting the sql and log directories on a ramdisk.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> OTH,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -giovanni
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Tihomir Culjaga<
>> tculjaga at gmail.com>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> > Hello,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > i'm trying to use freeswitch as a redirecting server meaning FS
>> has
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > receive an INVITE and according to some rules it will redirect
>> calls
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > other destinations.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > CALLING_USER FREESWITCH
>> >> >> > SOMEWHERE
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > INVITE ------------------------------->
>> >> >> > <------------------------------ 100 Trying
>> >> >> > <------------------------------ 302 Moved Temporary
>> >> >> > ACK ------------------------------->
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> INVITE--------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Well, wverything works well except i have perfromance issues ....
>> on
>> >> >> > my
>> >> >> > HW
>> >> >> > FS cannot do more than 40 CPS (INVITE answered by 302 Moved
>> >> >> > Temporary).
>> >> >> > When
>> >> >> > i increase the rate, FS starts delaying 302 response. Right at 50
>> CPS
>> >> >> > i
>> >> >> > see
>> >> >> > "calls" being build up in FS and the delay begining to grow.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > When i observe the machine, load average is almost nothing (load
>> >> >> > average:
>> >> >> > 1.41, 0.61, 0.60) CPU never goes to 100%, and i see only one
>> thread
>> >> >> > taking
>> >> >> > most load... all others are just sitting there with 1-5 % CPU
>> time.
>> >> >> > This looks to me as FS handles 302 messages in a single thread?!?!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > tculjaga at FS:/usr/local/freeswitch/conf/dialplan$ top -H
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > top - 10:41:37 up 167 days, 20:42, 3 users, load average: 1.41,
>> >> >> > 0.61,
>> >> >> > 0.60
>> >> >> > Tasks: 83 total, 2 running, 81 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0
>> zombie
>> >> >> > Cpu(s): 25.3%us, 1.5%sy, 0.0%ni, 30.3%id, 42.7%wa, 0.0%hi,
>> >> >> > 0.2%si,
>> >> >> > 0.0%st
>> >> >> > Mem: 2074520k total, 571244k used, 1503276k free, 259604k
>> >> >> > buffers
>> >> >> > Swap: 2650684k total, 3020k used, 2647664k free, 153868k
>> >> >> > cached
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+
>> >> >> > COMMAND
>> >> >> > 4814 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 38 1.0 3:10.29
>> >> >> > freeswitch
>> >> >> > 4800 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 6 1.0 0:08.26
>> >> >> > freeswitch
>> >> >> > 4798 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 R 5 1.0 0:24.46
>> >> >> > freeswitch
>> >> >> > 4787 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 2 1.0 0:11.24
>> >> >> > freeswitch
>> >> >> > 4794 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:11.42
>> >> >> > freeswitch
>> >> >> > 4803 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:11.74
>> >> >> > freeswitch
>> >> >> > 4788 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:02.96
>> >> >> > freeswitch
>> >> >> > 4804 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:01.64
>> >> >> > freeswitch
>> >> >> > 4807 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:01.68
>> >> >> > freeswitch
>> >> >> > 4811 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:02.50
>> >> >> > freeswitch
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > cat /proc/cpuinfo
>> >> >> > processor : 0
>> >> >> > vendor_id : GenuineIntel
>> >> >> > cpu family : 6
>> >> >> > model : 15
>> >> >> > model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5140 @ 2.33GHz
>> >> >> > stepping : 6
>> >> >> > cpu MHz : 2333.560
>> >> >> > cache size : 4096 KB
>> >> >> > physical id : 0
>> >> >> > siblings : 2
>> >> >> > core id : 0
>> >> >> > cpu cores : 2
>> >> >> > apicid : 0
>> >> >> > initial apicid : 0
>> >> >> > fdiv_bug : no
>> >> >> > hlt_bug : no
>> >> >> > f00f_bug : no
>> >> >> > coma_bug : no
>> >> >> > fpu : yes
>> >> >> > fpu_exception : yes
>> >> >> > cpuid level : 10
>> >> >> > wp : yes
>> >> >> > flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr
>> >> >> > pge
>> >> >> > mca
>> >> >> > cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe lm
>> >> >> > constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2
>> >> >> > ssse3
>> >> >> > cx16
>> >> >> > xtpr dca lahf_lm
>> >> >> > bogomips : 4670.78
>> >> >> > clflush size : 64
>> >> >> > power management:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > processor : 1
>> >> >> > vendor_id : GenuineIntel
>> >> >> > cpu family : 6
>> >> >> > model : 15
>> >> >> > model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5140 @ 2.33GHz
>> >> >> > stepping : 6
>> >> >> > cpu MHz : 2333.560
>> >> >> > cache size : 4096 KB
>> >> >> > physical id : 0
>> >> >> > siblings : 2
>> >> >> > core id : 1
>> >> >> > cpu cores : 2
>> >> >> > apicid : 1
>> >> >> > initial apicid : 1
>> >> >> > fdiv_bug : no
>> >> >> > hlt_bug : no
>> >> >> > f00f_bug : no
>> >> >> > coma_bug : no
>> >> >> > fpu : yes
>> >> >> > fpu_exception : yes
>> >> >> > cpuid level : 10
>> >> >> > wp : yes
>> >> >> > flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr
>> >> >> > pge
>> >> >> > mca
>> >> >> > cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe lm
>> >> >> > constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2
>> >> >> > ssse3
>> >> >> > cx16
>> >> >> > xtpr dca lahf_lm
>> >> >> > bogomips : 4666.82
>> >> >> > clflush size : 64
>> >> >> > power management:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > uname -a
>> >> >> > Linux l01sipindir1 2.6.26-1-686 #1 SMP Sat Jan 10 18:29:31 UTC
>> 2009
>> >> >> > i686
>> >> >> > GNU/Linux
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Of course, i've tuned the machine up
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > ulimit -c unlimited
>> >> >> > ulimit -d unlimited
>> >> >> > ulimit -f unlimited
>> >> >> > ulimit -i unlimited
>> >> >> > ulimit -n 999999
>> >> >> > ulimit -q unlimited
>> >> >> > ulimit -u unlimited
>> >> >> > ulimit -v unlimited
>> >> >> > ulimit -x unlimited
>> >> >> > ulimit -s 240
>> >> >> > ulimit -l unlimited
>> >> >> > ulimit -a
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Started FS with minimum modules but still 40 CPS seems to be the
>> >> >> > limit.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > So, is there any way to improve performance?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Tihomir.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> >> > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
>> >> >> > FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
>> >> >> > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > UNSUBSCRIBE:
>> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
>> >> >> > http://www.freeswitch.org
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
>> >> >> FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
>> >> >> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
>> >> >>
>> >> >> UNSUBSCRIBE:
>> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
>> >> >> http://www.freeswitch.org
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
>> >> > FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
>> >> > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
>> >> > UNSUBSCRIBE:
>> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
>> >> > http://www.freeswitch.org
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
>> >> FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
>> >> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
>> >> UNSUBSCRIBE:
>> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
>> >> http://www.freeswitch.org
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
>> > FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
>> > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
>> > UNSUBSCRIBE:
>> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
>> > http://www.freeswitch.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
>> FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
>> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
>> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
>> http://www.freeswitch.org
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
> FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
> http://www.freeswitch.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20090826/d8fe59b2/attachment-0002.html
More information about the FreeSWITCH-users
mailing list