On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 09:38:41AM +0200, Alexander Malysh wrote: > Hi, > > not only this is issue. You want not sleep! Just think about it a bit.
Sleeping was the current approach so I just followed it. I think the idea behind that (and behind the code to ensure the sleeping time is accomplished) is that the smsc have different threads for TX(MTs) and RX(MOs) so making the TX thread sleep shouldn't be a problem, this might be a false assumption. > Hint: you want to process MOs and ACKs without delays... > -1 Could you point me to some code affected by this? And please don't just tell me that the way throughput is currently implemented is wrong and therefore the patch I made to fix the current implementation is also wrong. I'd really appreciate it, since I'm only trying to help by fixing a problem. If the current (sleeping) approach is wrong, great, let's talk about it and find another way to implement it better. > Thanks, > Alex > > P.S. I already posted patch that fixes this issue but not in ideal way. > SMSC will not sleep but sending > all allowed messages in the time slot at full speed instead of delaying > each message. Full speed? I'm not sure I get that point keeping in mind that if you send for a 10 sms/s throughput, 20 sms in 1 second and then nothing for another second, you still violated the throughput, as you sent 20sms/s. Thanks for your input on my patch, I appreciate it, and hope you have time to further explain your points. Damián Viano(Des).
