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.html
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