That's easy for you to say because you are using the mailing list not running it or taking a personal vested interest in maintaining the quality of it's content. We are trying to make sure we help everyone all day long every day constantly. If you personally had to deal with every time we get this recurring "load testing" threads, you might understand. The alternative would be for us to lower our standards and let the list run away with itself and not care if we actually keep up on it. What mailing lists are for is anything the owner of the list wants it to be for. He is welcome to continue to say anything he wants and we are obliged to reply however we want. It's a 2 way street. You seem to suggest that we don't have to right to have policies on our own community that many people are very satisfied with only because we do exactly what we want to run our own community. You as well are welcome to your opinion which is duly noted. We still however, do not like load testing threads. The individuals here who have volunteered to set up some wiki info with the proper disclaimers may produce a resource we can send people to and be done with it. That is what WIKIs and FAQs are for..... On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Vlasis Hatzistavrou <vhatz@kinetix.gr> wrote:
On 20/8/2010 5:52 μμ, Anthony Minessale wrote:
Yet another load test thread.........................
This is why we don't like them.
Too bad you missed my presentation at cluecon.....
Do you hear yourself btw? Quibbling about completely free software *only* doing 200cps in your fake test? I don't know if I missed any message in this thread, but why do you say that the tester did a fake test?
200cps is 4 times the industry standard FYI and if you were really doing 200cps in real life you would be so rich at our expense that you could afford more boxes.
you clearly ignored all of our repeated recommendations. Use the following or you are on your own.......
This OS Centos 5.x x86_64
If someone is on his own for any other OS than Centos 5.x x86_64 then why is FS offered for so many different platforms?
It's only natural for people to want to test it on their favorite platform... Perhaps, as you recommend, Centos 5.x x86_64 gives the best results over all other platforms, but last time I checked, a user is still allowed to ask performance related questions for his favorite platform in this mailing list, right?
Woody's post was not expressing any negative opinion about FS's performance. He didn't comment on whether 200cps was too little or too much. He just wrote that the CPU usage increased in an unexpected manner and wonders how/if he can solve this. He wrote that he was doing a load test scenario, he didn't write that he was making money at 200cps "at your expense". And he wrote all this in a manner which was neither insulting nor abusive.
The poster just wanted to learn something, see if others have gotten better results with other setups. He was trying to make a valid discussion to solve a problem, and other users were actually replying to him.
This is what mailing lists are for, right?
I really don't understand why red flags have to be raised every time the word "performance" is mentioned in this mailing list.
-- Best regards, Vlasis Hatzistavrou.
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Anthony Minessale II FreeSWITCH http://www.freeswitch.org/ ClueCon http://www.cluecon.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/FreeSWITCH_wire AIM: anthm MSN:anthony_minessale@hotmail.com GTALK/JABBER/PAYPAL:anthony.minessale@gmail.com IRC: irc.freenode.net #freeswitch FreeSWITCH Developer Conference sip:888@conference.freeswitch.org googletalk:conf+888@conference.freeswitch.org pstn:+19193869900