-----
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