-----
Original Message -----
Sent:
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:19 AM
Subject:
Re: [Freeswitch-users] Freeswitch memory issue/question
We have a policy against load testing issues on this
mailing list.
What you are doing is most likely doing something
wrong and we don't have time to debug it for you.
We get way too many
requests like this and there is a 99% result in proving user error and
improper load testing.
You can consider paid support from
FreeSWITCH Solutions LLC for $175/hr per consultant and an ongoing support
contract for $10k/yr to deal with business related bugfixing and
support.
The free help we give here is based on a community shared
resource pool and we simply do not have enough to go around helping people
with your type of issue. Please feel free to report bugs if you can
pinpoint one using a more realistic use case that does not involve DDosing
your box with 10 million invites.
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 5:11 AM, Henry Huang
<b_ball_henry@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear developers:
Our product is close to
sipping stage and we are doing stress tests on FS servers. We have now
hit a dead end with our test results and running out of ideas. And the
result is pointing to memory issues. We have ran our test on both FS
1.0.4 and 1.0.6 trunk with SIPP to do simply invite tests.
Here
is the test senario:
Send 10,000,000 invites to our test server
running FS 1.0.6 with fixed amount of invites per second. The xml
dialplan simply bridge the call to an unknown/unregistered user like so
(user/500001) and therefore FS would hang up once it doesn't find the
user. When running the test, FS is steady, but the memory usage slowly
piles up over time. The memory keeps adding up till it hit the ceiling,
then FS crash. I don't understand what could be holding the memory and
not releasing it since we are not doing anything special and the calls
are not being answered. And I forgot to mention, through out the whole
test, the CPU usage stays at about 35% .
Please
help
Besides FS native test, we have created our own
application module to run the same test. The app is written in C and
basically what we did is to point the xml dialplan to the custom app.
Inside our app , we are simply doing the same kind of test as the xml
dialplan would do. The only thing we did for the stress test is the
following code:
switch_core_session_execute_application(session, "bridge",
"user/500001");
Like the xml dialplan test, we
are bridging the call to a unregistered user, so the call would hang up
right away if system doesn't find the user. But the bizarre thing is
this - the memory usage is about 7 ~ 8 times as much as we are running
only xml dialplan. This I don't understand. Our app is calling the
native FS C function to bridge the call , why would it use more memory
than the xml dialplan...
your input would be very much
appreciated.
thanks
--
Henry
Huang
aka bbhenry
VoIP & Open Source software
Consultant
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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