On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 12:58 -0400, Matt Roth wrote: > So it looks like processor interrupts are the culprit. > > Possible solutions to this problem include (please feel free to add to > this list): > - An Asterisk slave server pool ( > http://home.comcast.net/~mroth01/LargeAsteriskSetup.gif ) > - A TDM-VoIP gateway (Cisco, Quintum, AudioCodes, Lucent) > - Using Sangoma cards (As per David Mandelstam, Sangoma cards use > proprietary drivers and there are operational setups using 4 quads per > machine)
Just wondering, but does the AMD multi CPU architecture improve the interrupt handling? My understanding of that architecture is that each CPU can deal with "it's own" PCI bus/interrupts/etc independently of each other, and also with their own memory/etc? Would this improve the scalability? In fact, would a multi-PCI bus system by itself 'solve' the problem? > I'm not confident that the Asterisk software scales well under certain > conditions, such as using Monitor to digitally record 16 spans of voice > channels, so solving the card issue may not be the last step in a large > installation. If anyone has any insight on this, please post it to the > list. Well, what are the overheads of monitoring a call as opposed to simply bridging it from a digium channel to a IP channel (ie, the voice is still passing through asterisk)? As I see it, you have: * Conversion from ulaw/alaw -> slinear * Conversion from slinear -> file format (what if you record in alaw/ulaw?) * Disk subsystem (writing to the disk) On a suitable system, I think the CPU involved in the transcoding from ulaw/alaw to slinear would be minimal. Converting from slinear to gsm for example, might be quite high, but if you record in ulaw/alaw, then this might work. Also, CPU overhead on disk performance should be minimal if using a reasonable SCSI controller. Lets see, 64000 / 8 * 30 * 8 = 1920000 bytes/sec bps bits per byte channels spans So, we are only writing 2 Mega Bytes / sec to the disk. That isn't exactly a lot of load for a disk to handle.... Sure, sustained transfer rates, interrupts, etc.... but really, 2MB/sec seems so.... slow :) So, is it really an issue? Dunno, someone want to run a couple of spans through monitor and try it out? We won't really know until we try it... Just my 2c worth... -- -- Adam Goryachev Website Managers Ph: +61 2 8304 0000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +61 2 9345 4396 www.websitemanagers.com.au _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users