[Freeswitch-users] RTP delay > 100ms by performance testing with freeswitch as trancoding device SILK to G711a

[Hoexum, Edwin]

Gents,

Thank you for the discussion I will try  to test on a box without virtualization. And  play with de Ethernet cards (intel ) to divide the traffic maybe some bonding of interfaces (interrupts stuff) etc..
I will let you know the results.



mvg,
Edwin
[cid:image001.gif at 01CD6A4C.8EC89060]
Edwin Hoexum | Senior Systeeem Specialist | Voice Management
_________________________________________________________________
Dr. van Deenweg 120, Zwolle | Postbus 9501 | 9703 LM Groningen | www.ziggo.nl<http://www.office.ziggo.nl/>
Tel: +31887172699 | Mobiel: +31655148679| e-mailadres: Edwin.hoexum at office.ziggo.nl<mailto:Edwin.hoexum at office.ziggo.nl>
Werk Locaties:
Maandag en Woensdag locatie Utrecht
Dinsdag, Donderdag en Vrijdag locatie Zwolle

Van: freeswitch-users-bounces at lists.freeswitch.org [mailto:freeswitch-users-bounces at lists.freeswitch.org] Namens A E G
Verzonden: zaterdag 7 juli 2012 3:58
Aan: FreeSWITCH Users Help
Onderwerp: Re: [Freeswitch-users] RTP delay > 100ms by performance testing with freeswitch as trancoding device SILK to G711a

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Stanislav Sinyagin <ssinyagin at yahoo.com<mailto:ssinyagin at yahoo.com>> wrote:
OpenVZ and XEN VPS'es are usually fine for quick prototyping and feature tests.
Also they would be fine for private PBXes with low call volumes.
For hundreds of simultaneous calls, it's probably cheaper to rent dedicated hardware servers.
On the other side, if you have some smart load balancing, probably you can build a scalable design with VPS'es and eventually migrate to physical servers when volumes  are high enough.

also for a calling card business, probably the most critical CPU resource would be needed for the IVR and real-time billing, but not for the calls themselves.


Thanks Anthony and Stanislav.

I think I have enough warning along with some encouraging words to build a strategy.

Thanks again., Now the search for the right IaaS provider begins.






________________________________
From: A E G <all.eforums at gmail.com<mailto:all.eforums at gmail.com>>
To: FreeSWITCH Users Help <freeswitch-users at lists.freeswitch.org<mailto:freeswitch-users at lists.freeswitch.org>>
Sent: Saturday, July 7, 2012 12:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] RTP delay > 100ms by performance testing with freeswitch as trancoding device SILK to G711a

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Anthony Minessale <anthony.minessale at gmail.com<mailto:anthony.minessale at gmail.com>> wrote:
I would be insane to endorse using it in a virtual world.  The support
expectations would consume the rest of my life.
I try to make the code work well on real boxes and if it works on
virtual ones then that's a bonus =D

We have good luck with openVZ since its a single real kernel and
virtual runtimes but either way we do not recommend it so its a use at
your own risk kind of thing.


Yup agree and acknowledge that you wouldn't endorse or offer to support it, and nor should you. Simply trying to pick your (and anyone else who wants to chime in) brain on the topic. Totally PoC'ing it at my own risk :)

So, in that spirit, just one last message about it. Just like sharing the experience with OpenVZ, let's just say that I am insane and I still want to try it in a private cloud. Would you say the resource consumption of FS (assuming it's just receiving the call, having it routed by a custom routing engine via ESL, and switching it) be more than that in the "real" world for the same call volume barring any clock sync/skew/jitter issues? Would something like Cloudstack on hardware (like the one you recommended earlier) with a FS VM with 12 vcpu cores, 24GB RAM and DAS be able to handle something like 300-400 concurrent calls or am I out of my mind?

Thx


On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 3:59 PM, A E G <all.eforums at gmail.com<mailto:all.eforums at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Yup got that, and are you saying the same is applicable and true even if one
> was to try and run FreeSWITCH on a private cloud or in a virtual
> environment? assuming of course that those tips would then apply to the
> machine on which the Hypervisor will run.
>
> Just trying to get a handle on whether running FreeSWITCH to do something
> like wholesale or calling card traffic in a purely virtual environment is /
> has proven to work. You probably know the most in terms of all different
> environments people are running FS in, and if you (or they) have pointers
> specific to it being run in a virtual environment.
>
> Thanks so much
>
> On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Anthony Minessale
> <anthony.minessale at gmail.com<mailto:anthony.minessale at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Like I said "Really Really Nice Motherboard", as many CPU as
>> possible/affordable, and a good chunk of RAM.
>> Motherboard is the most important, a cheap motherboard with a ton of
>> cores is a waste.
>>



________________________________
This message is confidential and may be privileged. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, taking any action with reference to this information by persons other then the intended recipient is prohibited. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message from all computers. Please note that e-mails are susceptible to change. The sender will not accept liability for the improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in this message.

Spaar het milieu door deze e-mail niet te printen/Please consider the environment before printing this email.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20120725/c3d20a15/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 8196 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
Url : http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20120725/c3d20a15/attachment-0001.gif