----- 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