On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Michael Petruzzello < michael.petruzze...@civi.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29 at 11:14:04 AM, Richard Mudgett<rmudgett at digium.com > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__digium.com&d=CwMFaQ&c=q3cDpHe1hF8lXU5EFjNM_A&r=50uagQBTpQAKCx3KjAwJcMd6ygCPToAyDAxH5npANtf7nLmyZ65ofHGUgyJr9BW8&m=RzNw4lQyfY2yXT49Ylv_v1goTGLiuwUxFtihFJb5GAs&s=P78xn7-C1l6ETO4vrsRQlsDcWLZFaEJEG71kAzrXHOU&e=>> > wrote: > > Each softmix bridge has only one thread performing all of the media > mixing > > for the bridge. To > > get better mixing performance for such a large conference, you will need > to > > create several > > softmix bridges in a hierarchy with the bridges linked by local channels. > > A bridge is only able to handle around 2000-2500 channels, so I created 15 > bridges with 14 channels bridging the bridges together. > > When doing this an error I see a lot is WARNING[98920]: channel.c:1101 > __ast_queue_frame: Exceptionally long voice queue length queuing to > Local/**********@default-00000000;2, which then turns into WARNING[47525]: > pjproject:0 <?>: sip_transactio .Unable to register INVITE transaction > (key exists) and ERROR[47525]: res_pjsip.c:2777 ast_sip_create_dialog_uas: > Could not create dialog with endpoint sippeer. Object already exists > (PJ_EEXISTS). Finally the following repeats over and over again, [Jun 30 > 12:22:21] ERROR[84189][C-00000958]: netsock2.c:305 ast_sockaddr_resolve: > getaddrinfo("domain.name > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__domain.name&d=CwMFaQ&c=q3cDpHe1hF8lXU5EFjNM_A&r=50uagQBTpQAKCx3KjAwJcMd6ygCPToAyDAxH5npANtf7nLmyZ65ofHGUgyJr9BW8&m=RzNw4lQyfY2yXT49Ylv_v1goTGLiuwUxFtihFJb5GAs&s=0TFQxSqdacQKRz5CbZtpR8WMsE1K1ZdgwZDCoWQPAnU&e=>", > "(null)", ...): Temporary failure in name resolution > [Jun 30 12:22:21] WARNING[84189][C-00000958]: acl.c:800 resolve_first: > Unable to lookup 'domain.name > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__domain.name&d=CwMFaQ&c=q3cDpHe1hF8lXU5EFjNM_A&r=50uagQBTpQAKCx3KjAwJcMd6ygCPToAyDAxH5npANtf7nLmyZ65ofHGUgyJr9BW8&m=RzNw4lQyfY2yXT49Ylv_v1goTGLiuwUxFtihFJb5GAs&s=0TFQxSqdacQKRz5CbZtpR8WMsE1K1ZdgwZDCoWQPAnU&e=> > '. > > The last error just keeps on repeating and calls can no longer join (only > around 3,500 make it on before this starts to occur). Calling in manually I > receive an "all circuits are busy" message. > > I'm going to try halving the number of bridges, but is there anything else > I can do to improve performance? This seems to be the last hurdle to use > one server for 10,000 callers. > If you don't need all of your participants actually to be speaking at a time (and I hope not with that kind of volume), you could use holding bridges for the vast majority of the partipants. Link the bridges using a local channel with the Hold bridge side being set to use the 'announcer' bridge role and the hold bridge will effectively just be voiceless conference participants. If you want, you can listen for DTMF events to move the participants back and forth between the different bridges. -- *Jonathan R. Rose*Senior Systems Engineer Emergency CallWorks Motorola Solutions email: jonathan.r...@motorolasolutions.com
-- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
