[Freeswitch-users] mod_conference scalability

Brian West brian at freeswitch.org
Thu Dec 17 11:33:42 PST 2009

If you're going to have that many listeners then it would be best to use something like shoutcast to broadcast the stream out to a local stream on various different boxes... then tie the callers into a stream... when they have questions uuid_transfer them into the conf.. then back to the stream when done.  This would scale to very large numbers because you could split it out into 100's of boxes if needed.


On Dec 17, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Brian wrote:

> Hi Mike,
> I didn’t get around to testing on the FreeSWITCH trunk yet. Are there substantial fixes to mod_conference in the FreeSWITCH trunk that might increase capacity for my scenario of one speaker and many listeners? If I want to put this into a production environment, I would need a stable version, which as far as I know is the 1.0.4 version.
> However, I did test on Asterisk 1.4 using app_conference, and doing the same scenario was able to get 1 speaker and 600 listeners on a single conference with no audio issues. The CPU at that point was just over 300%, same as where the single conference scenario failed on FreeSWITCH with 300 listeners.  I was able to push it to over 700 listeners before I reached 400% CPU usage (I guess maxing out my quad-core processors), and asterisk finally crashed. But up until that point, there were no audio problems.
> I’ve read a lot about how FreeSWITCH is supposed to be more scalable than Asterisk, but unless there is something wrong with my FreeSWITCH setup, Asterisk was clearly the winner in this test – more than doubling FreeSWITCH capacity in this case. Again, maybe there is something on the FreeSWITCH side that I’m doing wrong, but I don’t see what it could be.
> Brian.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20091217/c79a9440/attachment-0002.html 

More information about the FreeSWITCH-users mailing list