Sorry, forgot to copy the list. -----Original Message----- From: Rene Kluwen [mailto:rene.klu...@chimit.nl] Sent: Sunday, 22 August, 2010 20:53 To: 'Hillel Bilman'; 'Davit Mirzoyan'; 'Alvaro Cornejo'; 'Nikos Balkanas'; 'ad...@impexrur.pl' Subject: RE: smppbox bulk sms: slow reception from a client
For the ones who are worried about smppbox performance. Here is something that I believe in better than the queue implementation (like in my earlier post of today). At some point in time, I made smppbox wait for a bearerbox ack before acknowledging the message back to the ESME and vice versa. In the following patch, I turned that back again. I immediately acknowledge the message, irregardless what it's relaying status later is going to be. If you have problems with smppbox and/or slow performance, this patch might be for you. I made the patch in such a manner that it is easy to make a configuration option for this, in a later stage. Please test. == Rene -----Original Message----- From: Hillel Bilman [mailto:hbil...@ecommunicate.biz] Sent: Sunday, 22 August, 2010 18:59 To: rene.klu...@chimit.nl Cc: devel@kannel.org Subject: RE: smppbox bulk sms: slow reception from a client Thanks for the update and to Chimit for smppbox in general. To take up the discussion from the user group, you mentioned a great idea to have another set of queues that smppbox only uses. To add to this, it would be great to have the same set of queues where you can set priority and range 0-3 is allowed. Then this prevents your smppbox flooding bearer box and also you can far more easily isolate problems from smppbox. Regards
smppbox_direct_acks_1.patch
Description: Binary data
