Hi Giovanny, thanks for your help, everything that heavyly accesses the disk is on ramdisk now... hopefully will get some real traffic pretty soon... On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Giovanni Maruzzelli <gmaruzz@celliax.org>wrote:
is a heavely multithreaded software, it benefits from number of CPUs (or cores), RAM, and heavy duty kernel features (found in 64bit kernels)
put all accesses on ramdisk, leave out the modules you don't use...
experiment, test, and find the best for your specific application/workload
test not only with sipp, but with real load too (often they're very different)
-gm
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Tihomir Culjaga<tculjaga@gmail.com> wrote:
thanks for the feedback... this is something im going to do tomorrow...
what about other things?
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Jay Binks <jaybinks@gmail.com> wrote:
Everytime someone asks this , the resounding answer is use a 64bit os.. No question Jay
On 25/08/2009, at 23:19, Tihomir Culjaga <tculjaga@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey Giovanni,
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.... This behaviour leads to a waste of 40% CPU time... waiting for other processes (mainly disk access) to finish!!!
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 :).
What can be wrong? What are the limits in CPU usage (50%, 60%, 70%, 80%...) we should not cross? What fine tuning do we need in order to asure a long high load run?
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%+ ?
Tihomir.
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Giovanni Maruzzelli <gmaruzz@celliax.org> wrote:
Maybe your load comes from disk access?
Try putting the sql and log directories on a ramdisk.
OTH,
-giovanni
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Tihomir Culjaga<tculjaga@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
i'm trying to use freeswitch as a redirecting server meaning FS has
to
receive an INVITE and according to some rules it will redirect calls to other destinations.
CALLING_USER FREESWITCH SOMEWHERE
INVITE -------------------------------> <------------------------------ 100 Trying <------------------------------ 302 Moved Temporary ACK ------------------------------->
INVITE--------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Well, wverything works well except i have perfromance issues .... on
my
HW FS cannot do more than 40 CPS (INVITE answered by 302 Moved Temporary). When i increase the rate, FS starts delaying 302 response. Right at 50 CPS i see "calls" being build up in FS and the delay begining to grow.
When i observe the machine, load average is almost nothing (load average: 1.41, 0.61, 0.60) CPU never goes to 100%, and i see only one thread taking most load... all others are just sitting there with 1-5 % CPU time. This looks to me as FS handles 302 messages in a single thread?!?!
tculjaga@FS:/usr/local/freeswitch/conf/dialplan$ top -H
top - 10:41:37 up 167 days, 20:42, 3 users, load average: 1.41, 0.61, 0.60 Tasks: 83 total, 2 running, 81 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 25.3%us, 1.5%sy, 0.0%ni, 30.3%id, 42.7%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.2%si, 0.0%st Mem: 2074520k total, 571244k used, 1503276k free, 259604k buffers Swap: 2650684k total, 3020k used, 2647664k free, 153868k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 4814 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 38 1.0 3:10.29 freeswitch 4800 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 6 1.0 0:08.26 freeswitch 4798 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 R 5 1.0 0:24.46 freeswitch 4787 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 2 1.0 0:11.24 freeswitch 4794 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:11.42 freeswitch 4803 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:11.74 freeswitch 4788 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:02.96 freeswitch 4804 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:01.64 freeswitch 4807 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:01.68 freeswitch 4811 root 20 0 34188 20m 3780 S 1 1.0 0:02.50 freeswitch
cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 15 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5140 @ 2.33GHz stepping : 6 cpu MHz : 2333.560 cache size : 4096 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 2 core id : 0 cpu cores : 2 apicid : 0 initial apicid : 0 fdiv_bug : no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug : no coma_bug : no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 10 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr dca lahf_lm bogomips : 4670.78 clflush size : 64 power management:
processor : 1 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 15 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5140 @ 2.33GHz stepping : 6 cpu MHz : 2333.560 cache size : 4096 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 2 core id : 1 cpu cores : 2 apicid : 1 initial apicid : 1 fdiv_bug : no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug : no coma_bug : no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 10 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr dca lahf_lm bogomips : 4666.82 clflush size : 64 power management:
uname -a Linux l01sipindir1 2.6.26-1-686 #1 SMP Sat Jan 10 18:29:31 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux
Of course, i've tuned the machine up
ulimit -c unlimited ulimit -d unlimited ulimit -f unlimited ulimit -i unlimited ulimit -n 999999 ulimit -q unlimited ulimit -u unlimited ulimit -v unlimited ulimit -x unlimited ulimit -s 240 ulimit -l unlimited ulimit -a
Started FS with minimum modules but still 40 CPS seems to be the limit.
So, is there any way to improve performance?
Tihomir.
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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