One thing that seems to help a lot is to have a "Success Stories" page. A lot of the previous emails emphasize the point of benchmarking FS and hitting it hard with a suite of tools available to do just that. That all makes sense. The problem is that for a lot of newcomers, benchmarking doesn't really make a lot of sense right away. In more details ... the process would be something like this: a) I need to use a system that's able to do certain things for a conference for instance (happens to be my case). It needs to be flexible and do a bunch of things. b) FS seems like the best candidate out there "today". c) Get a whatever server and install FS on it. Nice the thing runs, it seems flexible, good performance, I can't believe my own eyes. Good product. d) Let me build an application around it now. Here is an ESL, WEB API, cool. The sky is the limit. e) Application is now built. f) Let's benchmark ... Ok, let me now buy what I think the best server will be and it'll cost $2000.00. g) FS is amazing, I am getting these many concurrent calls, active sessions, things are great for this X system that I bought. I will scale up and get 5 more of the same type of server. Now the question is, was that the right choice to make? Having access to a place where others post their results help you make a better determination on what kind of platforms to run your system on. Someone with whom I've had a nice exchange of words in the past threw something out there that was really helpful ... "Modern machine with dual core, 64 bit for best results"; if my memory serves me right. This is the kind of information that would be needed to then go out and buy the server/s and then do the actual benchmarking and correctly engineer/architect the platform. If I see that some of the success stories are using Servers X with Foo CPU/s and bar MEM, then that would be for me a good indication of the direction or areas to investigate, go into. If I then want top of the line tuning, excellent benchmarking and many more things, yeah having the commercial support and having to pay for it it's def. not a problem. After all a lot of work and hours go into developing the product and we are getting it free. That part is perfectly understood and supported as well as the development of some more specific features. Alfredo On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Anthony Minessale <anthony.minessale@gmail.com> wrote:
Helping with docs, now there is a topic we all groove on.
On Feb 13, 2010 4:43 PM, "Gavin Henry" <gavin.henry@gmail.com> wrote:
On 13 February 2010 22:07, Peder <peder@networkoblivion.com> wrote:
Instead of complaining about t...
Did you read any of this thread at all? The OP asked about techniques to benchmark his kit, and any rough figures. The projects answer was to hire them for some commercial support. So anything I post on the wiki is not official. My suggestion is merely to put the official project stance on any benchmark questions or post to the wiki some tips on how to run your own tests with a link to getting them verified by the team via the commercial support.
In no way am I complaining, just trying to get this cleared up for the next time someone asks. That's the whole point of docs and why I enjoy writing them. Write them once and refer people to them, fixing doc bugs along the way.
Gavin.
-- http://www.suretecsystems.com/services/openldap/ http://www.suretectelecom.com
_____________...
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org