Hey Giovanni,<br><br>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....<br>
This behaviour leads to a waste of 40% CPU time... waiting for other processes (mainly disk access) to finish!!!<br><br>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 :).<br>
<br><br>What can be wrong?<br>What are the limits in CPU usage (50%, 60%, 70%, 80%...) we should not cross?<br>What fine tuning do we need in order to asure a long high load run?<br><br><br><br>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%+ ?<br>
<br><br>Tihomir.<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Giovanni Maruzzelli <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gmaruzz@celliax.org">gmaruzz@celliax.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Maybe your load comes from disk access?<br>
<br>
Try putting the sql and log directories on a ramdisk.<br>
<br>
OTH,<br>
<br>
-giovanni<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Tihomir Culjaga<<a href="mailto:tculjaga@gmail.com">tculjaga@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hello,<br>
><br>
> i'm trying to use freeswitch as a redirecting server meaning FS has to<br>
> receive an INVITE and according to some rules it will redirect calls to<br>
> other destinations.<br>
><br>
><br>
> CALLING_USER FREESWITCH SOMEWHERE<br>
><br>
> INVITE -------------------------------><br>
> <------------------------------ 100 Trying<br>
> <------------------------------ 302 Moved Temporary<br>
> ACK -------------------------------><br>
> INVITE---------------------------------------------------------------------------------><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Well, wverything works well except i have perfromance issues .... on my HW<br>
> FS cannot do more than 40 CPS (INVITE answered by 302 Moved Temporary). When<br>
> i increase the rate, FS starts delaying 302 response. Right at 50 CPS i see<br>
> "calls" being build up in FS and the delay begining to grow.<br>
><br>
> When i observe the machine, load average is almost nothing (load average:<br>
> 1.41, 0.61, 0.60) CPU never goes to 100%, and i see only one thread taking<br>
> most load... all others are just sitting there with 1-5 % CPU time.<br>
> This looks to me as FS handles 302 messages in a single thread?!?!<br>
><br>
><br>
> tculjaga@FS:/usr/local/freeswitch/conf/dialplan$ top -H<br>
><br>
> top - 10:41:37 up 167 days, 20:42, 3 users, load average: 1.41, 0.61, 0.60<br>
> Tasks: 83 total, 2 running, 81 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie<br>
> Cpu(s): 25.3%us, 1.5%sy, 0.0%ni, 30.3%id, 42.7%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.2%si,<br>
> 0.0%st<br>
> Mem: 2074520k total, 571244k used, 1503276k free, 259604k buffers<br>
> Swap: 2650684k total, 3020k used, 2647664k free, 153868k cached<br>
><br>
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+<br>
> COMMAND<br>
> 4814 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 38 1.0 3:10.29<br>
> freeswitch<br>
> 4800 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 6 1.0 0:08.26<br>
> freeswitch<br>
> 4798 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 R 5 1.0 0:24.46<br>
> freeswitch<br>
> 4787 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 2 1.0 0:11.24<br>
> freeswitch<br>
> 4794 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:11.42<br>
> freeswitch<br>
> 4803 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:11.74<br>
> freeswitch<br>
> 4788 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:02.96<br>
> freeswitch<br>
> 4804 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:01.64<br>
> freeswitch<br>
> 4807 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:01.68<br>
> freeswitch<br>
> 4811 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:02.50 freeswitch<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> cat /proc/cpuinfo<br>
> processor : 0<br>
> vendor_id : GenuineIntel<br>
> cpu family : 6<br>
> model : 15<br>
> model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5140 @ 2.33GHz<br>
> stepping : 6<br>
> cpu MHz : 2333.560<br>
> cache size : 4096 KB<br>
> physical id : 0<br>
> siblings : 2<br>
> core id : 0<br>
> cpu cores : 2<br>
> apicid : 0<br>
> initial apicid : 0<br>
> fdiv_bug : no<br>
> hlt_bug : no<br>
> f00f_bug : no<br>
> coma_bug : no<br>
> fpu : yes<br>
> fpu_exception : yes<br>
> cpuid level : 10<br>
> wp : yes<br>
> flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca<br>
> cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe lm<br>
> constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16<br>
> xtpr dca lahf_lm<br>
> bogomips : 4670.78<br>
> clflush size : 64<br>
> power management:<br>
><br>
> processor : 1<br>
> vendor_id : GenuineIntel<br>
> cpu family : 6<br>
> model : 15<br>
> model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5140 @ 2.33GHz<br>
> stepping : 6<br>
> cpu MHz : 2333.560<br>
> cache size : 4096 KB<br>
> physical id : 0<br>
> siblings : 2<br>
> core id : 1<br>
> cpu cores : 2<br>
> apicid : 1<br>
> initial apicid : 1<br>
> fdiv_bug : no<br>
> hlt_bug : no<br>
> f00f_bug : no<br>
> coma_bug : no<br>
> fpu : yes<br>
> fpu_exception : yes<br>
> cpuid level : 10<br>
> wp : yes<br>
> flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca<br>
> cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe lm<br>
> constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16<br>
> xtpr dca lahf_lm<br>
> bogomips : 4666.82<br>
> clflush size : 64<br>
> power management:<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> uname -a<br>
> Linux l01sipindir1 2.6.26-1-686 #1 SMP Sat Jan 10 18:29:31 UTC 2009 i686<br>
> GNU/Linux<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Of course, i've tuned the machine up<br>
><br>
> ulimit -c unlimited<br>
> ulimit -d unlimited<br>
> ulimit -f unlimited<br>
> ulimit -i unlimited<br>
> ulimit -n 999999<br>
> ulimit -q unlimited<br>
> ulimit -u unlimited<br>
> ulimit -v unlimited<br>
> ulimit -x unlimited<br>
> ulimit -s 240<br>
> ulimit -l unlimited<br>
> ulimit -a<br>
><br>
><br>
> Started FS with minimum modules but still 40 CPS seems to be the limit.<br>
><br>
><br>
> So, is there any way to improve performance?<br>
><br>
><br>
> Tihomir.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
</div></div>> _______________________________________________<br>
> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org">FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users" target="_blank">http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users</a><br>
> UNSUBSCRIBE:<a href="http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users" target="_blank">http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users</a><br>
> <a href="http://www.freeswitch.org" target="_blank">http://www.freeswitch.org</a><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org">FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users" target="_blank">http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users</a><br>
UNSUBSCRIBE:<a href="http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users" target="_blank">http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users</a><br>
<a href="http://www.freeswitch.org" target="_blank">http://www.freeswitch.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>