Yessir. I am using the exact same ulimits below. I also increased the
sessions per second to 50 and max-sessions to 5000. Also as we are
moving into a high traffic period based on time of day. I've had it die
repeatedly on me, the following line was the last line printed ...
freeswitch: nua_stack.c:2396: nua_client_restart_request: Assertion
`nua_client_is_queued(cr)' failed.
this is the other last line I get if the system itself seems to be
overloaded
freeswitch: sofia.c:2138: sofia_handle_sip_i_state: Assertion
`tech_pvt->nh != ((void *)0)' failed.
I don't know if that is of any help or not. At the time I was seeing
approx 80-90 calls per sec hitting the server, based on the 'status'
command in the FS cli.
I don't have this built with debug symbols either at the moment. I
wanted to get a baseline of server with x can do y , based on how we use
it. I will likely get it rebuilt and find a way to reduce some of the
traffic load so I can effectively tshoot.
-e
It's seems fuzzy now but I think on Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 05:19:42PM -0600 , Anthony Minessale said:
> Did you increase the artificial limits in switch.conf.xml ?
>
> try these uimits
>
> 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 244
> ulimit -l unlimited
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Eric Liedtke <e@musinghalfwit.org> wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> I'm working on a server in an SBC setup. It has a copper 10/100 for
> admin and 2 GiGe connections for private/public peering(SIP signaling
> and media). I've been testing with some traffic and am finding I hit a
> ceiling around 800-900 active calls. The system CPU ends up being about
> 40% which seemed really high to me. Is this simply due to the amount of
> networking happening with the rtp in and out the different interfaces or am
> I
> operating something in a non optimized fasion ?
>
> It's an e1000 based card, I've tried messing around with the interrupt
> throttling but in the end the dynamic setting seemed to work best. Given
> that a chassis has done 3k simultaneous calls with about half the
> processing power I currently have in this server I must be running sub
> optimal.
>
> Any idea's of where I might look to correct this ? kernel tuning ?
> network tuning ? Other than seeing a lot of irq's from the network cards
> I"m not sure what else might be using up the system cpu.
>
> To squeeze out as much as possible I have the core databases housed in a
> tmpfs partiion, and I've also disabled the sql scoreboard (-nosql). Any
> other areas I should be exploring to increase the number of calls this
> chassis can process ?
>
> Thanks in advance for any ideas
>
> -Eric
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
> 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
> iax:guest@conference.freeswitch.org/888
> googletalk:conf+888@conference.freeswitch.org
> pstn:213-799-1400
> _______________________________________________
> 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