also from 2007 http://ftp.iptel.org/pub/sems/fostel_2007_coeffic_sems_load_balancing.pdf that says SEMS can make round robin and hash load balancing. I don't talk here about failover since this can be resolved with conventional clustering solution as hearbeat pacemaker redhat cluster etc... but especially load balancing to increase nujmber of calls Regards F ----- Original Message ----- From: Madovsky To: freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 11:56 AM Subject: Re: clustering question what FS team thinks about this SIP clustering architecture ? http://blogs.sun.com/kshitiz/entry/converged_load_balancer Regards F ----- Original Message ----- From: Madovsky To: freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 11:43 AM Subject: clustering question Hi, I searched some articles of FS in a cluster environment but there are some unclear writes : in http://www.technoclicks.com/article-2545.php from 2006 it says "Minessale says FreeSwitch won't be bounded by those same problems. The software is designed to run on a cluster of an unlimited number of servers though realistically that will be gated by the capacity of the network. Early tests on a single server showed simultaneous calls on a Pentium server running at . GHz. The server completed calls per second with bursts to calls per second." and this thread from 2008 http://www.mail-archive.com/freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org/msg05258.h... that describes contradiction of how to manage clustering. so is FS really be built as cluster to expand call capacity ? or is it be clustered by the fact that only serveral FS share a DB ? Regards F