[Freeswitch-users] What's better Unix ro Windows? LOL
peter.olsson at visionutveckling.se
Thu Jul 26 11:28:36 MSD 2012
I've been running FS both on Windows and Linux, mostly on Windows though. I believe the best choice is the OS you know the best. FS performs well on both platforms, so I think you are more likely to get the Windows box running better then a Linux box, since you are more familiar with it.
I do recommend at least Windows 2008 though, since older versions doesn't have as exact timing in the kernel. Windows 2008 R2 with 64-bit FS i the best choice.
26 jul 2012 kl. 03:17 skrev "Sean Devoy" <sdevoy at bizfocused.com<mailto:sdevoy at bizfocused.com>>:
I really hope this does not blow up into an ideological jihad, but I am curious what people think and if they have any evidence to support their claims. I am in fact a long time windows developer (anyone remember windows 2.2 – that was hard shit). I have chosen what may be a unique approach to FS “Configuration, Command and Control”.
I started using FS by building it on Centos 5.n. Fighting, scratching and clawing it into a working multi-tenant switch. Looking back, everything I needed to do was in the email tree, I just didn’t know what to ask. I have now moved FS on to a “production” VPS server for $30 a month with amazing success. See it here: http://www.synapseglobal.com/voip_services.php It comes prebuilt with Centos and FS latest build compiled and ready to go. That’s not why I am writing though. Their tech support is adamant that it can handle up 12 CONCURRENT CALLS at the base configuration.
I learned about IPTABLES and FAIL2BAN and like them very much. However, I still work better/faster/surer in my Windows environment. So, I have taken what some might think is the worst possible approach: Configure and Control my Centos FS Server from my own ASP.NET<http://ASP.NET> Web Application (hosted elsewhere). My approach is to use the socket interface to send commands and use programmatic SFTP to the SHH shell for XML file exchange. I am about 85% done with version 1.0 and very pleased with it. I hope to have customers be able to login and modify their own configurations (call routes, IVRs, extensions mapping to devices line keys, Cisco spa504g provisioning, etc). Other device provisioning is in the pipe, but we have all 504Gs here and the provisioning code has been a tremendous help.
Anyway, that is how I got to the odd work configuration, now I would like a discussion:
My belief is that the “slim profile” of Centos will allow FS to handle greater load on a given hardware profile than could be handled by FS on Windows with the same hardware. I would like to AVOID the issues of security for this discussion, I firmly believe that you will provide better security on the platform that you understand the best. Let’s just talk RAM, MIPS, NICs and FS performance and other issues I might be missing.
Should a Windows guy go with FS on Windows or do you really get more bang for your buck in a Unix environment?
I look forward to reading your thoughts.
Professional FreeSWITCH Consulting Services:
consulting at freeswitch.org<mailto:consulting at freeswitch.org>
Official FreeSWITCH Sites
Join Us At ClueCon - Aug 7-9, 2012
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org<mailto:FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org>
Join us at ClueCon 2011 Aug 9-11, 2011
More information about the FreeSWITCH-users