[Freeswitch-users] mod_conference scalability

Brian brian at proximosystems.com
Thu Dec 17 14:05:24 PST 2009 

Hi Dave,

That was one of the questions I had in my original post, was there an alternative way to implement a single speaker, many listener case? There was a suggestion proposed to use local streams instead of the conference. I'm not familiar with it, and I'm in the process of reading the wiki and source code to see what can be done with that. 

Thanks,

Brian.


-----Original Message-----
From: David Knell [mailto:dave at 3c.co.uk] 
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 4:07 PM
To: freeswitch-users at lists.freeswitch.org
Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] mod_conference scalability

Hi Brian,

I imagine that one of the issues is that you're using a complex
sledgehammer (mod_conference) to crack a simple nut - that of having
multiple listeners listening to a single speaker.

As far as I am aware, FreeSWITCH doesn't have anything built in which
will allow this kind of simple audio path switching - maybe someone more
knowledgeable than me will correct me if I'm wrong?

I presented some stuff at ClueCon which would address this kind of
simple application and ought to scale well beyond what you've seen with
FS or Asterisk.  It's still pretty basic [I'd do more with it if I
wasn't so busy joshing with the other Brian on Facebook], and has never
been deployed in anger but, if you're interested, drop me a note
off-list.

--Dave

> I didn’t realize there was a policy about load testing questions. What
> forum should I have used for this?
> 
>  
> 
> I didn’t get the chance to test on FS trunk yet, but when I do I will
> provide you with the feedback when I do. Just let me know what forum
> to use for this topic from now on.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>  
> 
> Brian.
> 
>  
> 
> From: Anthony Minessale [mailto:anthony.minessale at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 2:42 PM
> To: freeswitch-users at lists.freeswitch.org
> Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] mod_conference scalability
> 
> 
>  
> 
> One man's stable release is another man's 6 month old release with
> hundreds of known fixed bugs.
> If one of the core developers tells you to try it, you may as well
> take the time to try it now that you have opened a forum questioning
> the scalability.
> 
> When you tested asterisk did you actually use 600 phones and verify
> that each one can hear the audio perfectly and in time with what the
> speaker was saying?  Did you try same on FS? 
> 
> Did you optimize your dialplan on FS to deal with a load test or
> follow any of the recommended performance tuning page.
> 
> All of the answers to these questions are really moot because we have
> a policy against entertaining load testing questions but if you like
> asterisk, by all means, use it, and good luck to you if those numbers
> you are testing at are what you plan to put in real
> production.........
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Brian <brian at proximosystems.com>
> 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.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: Michael Jerris [mailto:mike at jerris.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 10:18 AM
> To: freeswitch-users at lists.freeswitch.org
> Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] mod_conference scalability
> 
> 
>  
> 
> I would be curious what the same tests produce with svn trunk of
> FreeSWITCH.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
>  
> 
> On Dec 16, 2009, at 4:49 PM, Brian wrote:
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> I’m new to FreeSWITCH and I’m testing the scalability of
> mod_conference to see if it will scale better that other solutions. My
> scenario is to have one speaker, and many listeners (mute). Since I
> have only one speaker, I was expecting this to scale well because
> there is no audio mixing required, just send each frame of the single
> speaker to each listener. Unfortunately, my testing was disappointing,
> and it didn’t scale nearly as well as I’d hoped (based on what I’ve
> read on how FreeSWITCH is supposed to be generally very scalable).
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Here’s my server setup is this:
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> FreeSWITCH 1.0.4, 64 bit CentOS 5.3, on a quad-core Xeon server, 4 Gig
> of RAM. I’ve set file logging to “notice” level. My conference profile
> is configured to suppress several events, hoping that it would improve
> performance.
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Here are a few scenarios I tested, and roughly where I reached the
> point of audio failure on the conferences:
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Scenario 1:
> 
> 
> 1 conference, 1 speaker, audio failed at approx 300 listeners (mute)
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Scenario 2:
> 
> 
> 4 conferences, 1 speaker per conference, audio failed approx 110
> listeners per conference (so just over 400 total channels on the
> system).
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Scenario 3:
> 
> 
> 16 conferences, 1 speaker per conference, audio failed at 32 listeners
> per conference (so just over 500 total channels on the system).
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Looking at the output from “top”, it seems that in all 3 scenarios,
> the audio quality failed when the % CPU for the FreeSWITCH process
> exceeded 300%.
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> I was hoping maybe someone else might have done similar testing, or
> maybe has suggestions on how to improve the performance. Or perhaps an
> alternate solution to the one speaker, many listener case?
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Brian.
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
> FreeSWITCH-users at 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 at 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 at hotmail.com
> GTALK/JABBER/PAYPAL:anthony.minessale at gmail.com
> IRC: irc.freenode.net #freeswitch
> 
> FreeSWITCH Developer Conference
> sip:888 at conference.freeswitch.org
> iax:guest at conference.freeswitch.org/888
> googletalk:conf+888 at conference.freeswitch.org
> pstn:+19193869900
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
> FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
> http://www.freeswitch.org

More information about the FreeSWITCH-users mailing list