[Freeswitch-users] 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

[Durmuş Ali Öztürk]

I will try to set up a fs system on CentOS, maybe the performance will be
better.

I am sorry but I dont understand the difference between cps and number of
active session.

If fs has 10 active sessions (with media), then the call per second should
be 10 too??

2010/7/28 Phillip Jones-2 [via freeswitch-users] <
ml-node+5344088-1127633527-580578 at n2.nabble.com<ml-node%2B5344088-1127633527-580578 at n2.nabble.com>
>

> >> The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest
> source
> code
>
> That would seem like a reasonable thing to do.....
>
> >> In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling
> parallel
> 30 number?
>
> In my (limited) experience there are two important things to control:
>
> 1) call per second
> 2) Total number of active sessions
>
> Calls per seconds appears (to me) to have a greater effect on the CPU. So
> at 1 call per second I would be looking at your CPU utilization and if it is
> maxing out then reducing that rate.
>
> My point being here that your box *may* be capable of handling 100 or 1000
> sessions, if the cps is lowered.
>
> HTH
>
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Durmuş Ali Öztürk <[hidden email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5344088&i=0>
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest
>> source
>> code?
>>
>> In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling
>> parallel
>> 30 number?
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5340996.html<http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5340996.html?by-user=t>
>> Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
>> [hidden email] <http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5344088&i=1>
>>
>> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
>> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
>> http://www.freeswitch.org <http://www.freeswitch.org?by-user=t>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
> [hidden email] <http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5344088&i=2>
> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
> http://www.freeswitch.org <http://www.freeswitch.org?by-user=t&by-user=t>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>  View message @
> http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5344088.html
> To unsubscribe from Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance
> problems), click here<http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/subscriptions/Unsubscribe.jtp?code=YWxpLnN0Z3RAZ21haWwuY29tfDUzNDA5OTZ8ODc3NDczNzM3>.
>
>
>

-- 
View this message in context: http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5345283.html
Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20100727/b74a4b83/attachment.html