> Looking at my /proc/interrupts: > > 0: 59709041 XT-PIC timer > 5: 597050409 XT-PIC wcfxo > 7: 597211339 XT-PIC wcfxo > 10: 4538876 XT-PIC eth0 > 11: 3044608 XT-PIC aic7xxx, eth1 > > The voice cards generate an order of magnitude more interrupts than > anything else. This "may" be why it's not recommended to share > interrupts on voice cards. Don't know if the T1 cards have a similar > issue. I would hope not. The x100p's are a pretty simplistic device. > They probably generate an interrupt for every byte. The x100p's are also > used for timing in things like MOH and MM conferences AFAIK. It seems > like it would be nice to only put one card in "timer mode" if that is > indeed what is generating all those interrupts. Could someone "in the > know" enlighten us?
The x100p incurres roughly 1000 interrupts per second. Someone on the list published a short unix command-line that essentially ran the above twice and calculated the interrupts / sec nicely. It was kind of a handy way to visually inspect the numbers to diagnose problems/issues. If I recall, that was around early/mid 2003 in the archives. I believe that "is" the zap timing referred to frequently relative to "do you have a zap card installed". Anyway, balancing the processing required per card verses how many cards can share an interrupt is a system engineering task (regardless of what the cards are doing). However, that engineering task is complicated by the lack of published _actual_ requirements/expectations for each type of card that can be installed/supported, and therefore raises questions (and some spontaneous off-the-wall responses) that aren't necessarily based on facts. Rich _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users