[asterisk-users] Capacity for transcode G711 to G729
Does anyone know how many active channels can support for transcoding ulaw to G729 by using 4x 3.6GHz Xeon Processors?Thanks, Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Capacity for transcode G711 to G729
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kokfoo Soo wrote: > Does anyone know how many active channels can support for transcoding ulaw to > G729 by using 4x 3.6GHz Xeon Processors? In one machine? I'd guess at around 200-300 absolute max if the calls are spread evenly across CPUs. Normal is around 120. - -- Cheers, Matt Riddell ___ http://www.sineapps.com/news.php (Daily Asterisk News - html) http://wap.sineapps.com (Daily Asterisk News for your cellphone) http://feeds.feedburner.com/AsteriskNews (Daily Asterisk News - rss) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFADDMS6d5vy0jeVcRAl9yAJ4+embAF/RQHtCxgI4xPGExZYHTYACeK73V MkOxPEozdCQtpdruxyUntW4= =RhOh -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Capacity for transcode G711 to G729
Hi matt, sorry this might be a stupid question but is a bit pertinent to me, I'd asked something similar in one of my last email regarding SMP. Do you know if (*) is capable of making use of HT support i.e is multi-threaded and improves performance for operations like transcoding? Is that a valid question or is this only dependant on the OS/Kernel, the CPU itself and the chipset on the motherboard? If I boot into an SMP kernel with Asterisk compiled with the SMP kernel source, would it just make use of multi-threading as the load increases on cpu-intensive operations? Also, when you said the normal is 120 simultaneous transcoding operations, what is "normal"? I have a P4 w/HT 3.4Ghz, 2GB RAM machine. Would that be above or below "normal"? Thanks much \R I'd guess at around 200-300 absolute max if the calls are spread evenly across CPUs. Normal is around 120. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Capacity for transcode G711 to G729
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 RR wrote: > Hi matt, > > sorry this might be a stupid question but is a bit pertinent to me, > I'd asked something similar in one of my last email regarding SMP. Do > you know if (*) is capable of making use of HT support i.e is > multi-threaded and improves performance for operations like > transcoding? Is that a valid question or is this only dependant on the I don't think you will get double or anything, in fact many people have suggested that HT be turned off when people experience problems. > OS/Kernel, the CPU itself and the chipset on the motherboard? If I > boot into an SMP kernel with Asterisk compiled with the SMP kernel > source, would it just make use of multi-threading as the load > increases on cpu-intensive operations? The best use I have seen is the newly converted IAX2 which can use multithreading in version 1.4, the beta of which should be released later this week. The best idea would be to compile Asterisk, run some tests (show translation recalc 60) with HT turned on, restart the box, bring it up with HT turned off and try again. You should also run a few calls and check the CPU. > Also, when you said the normal is 120 simultaneous transcoding > operations, what is "normal"? I have a P4 w/HT 3.4Ghz, 2GB RAM > machine. Would that be above or below "normal"? > > Thanks much > \R I would think that is above normal but not by much, I'm not sure what "normal" was, nor can I find the Digium document where this was stated. It wasn't that long ago. I'm doing some more tests on a 3000 line setup (external DS3s via Asterisk and SER clusters) at the moment which we are splitting to be half G.729 and half ulaw, and I will try to post some results. - -- Cheers, Matt Riddell ___ http://www.sineapps.com/news.php (Daily Asterisk News - html) http://wap.sineapps.com (Daily Asterisk News for your cellphone) http://feeds.feedburner.com/AsteriskNews (Daily Asterisk News - rss) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFAHYFS6d5vy0jeVcRAluMAJ0du5Itu3Va1yAXu0+2gxMrC3JjLACePaTL fdZacwEIEm4Z63ht6E/KrAY= =DbHV -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Capacity for transcode G711 to G729
What tools are you using for this? I'm sure you are aware of SIPp but wondered if you had anything else? Mark On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 21:41 +0200, Matt Riddell (IT) wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > RR wrote: > > Hi matt, > > > > sorry this might be a stupid question but is a bit pertinent to me, > > I'd asked something similar in one of my last email regarding SMP. Do > > you know if (*) is capable of making use of HT support i.e is > > multi-threaded and improves performance for operations like > > transcoding? Is that a valid question or is this only dependant on the > > I don't think you will get double or anything, in fact many people have > suggested that HT be turned off when people experience problems. > > > OS/Kernel, the CPU itself and the chipset on the motherboard? If I > > boot into an SMP kernel with Asterisk compiled with the SMP kernel > > source, would it just make use of multi-threading as the load > > increases on cpu-intensive operations? > > The best use I have seen is the newly converted IAX2 which can use > multithreading in version 1.4, the beta of which should be released > later this week. > > The best idea would be to compile Asterisk, run some tests (show > translation recalc 60) with HT turned on, restart the box, bring it up > with HT turned off and try again. > > You should also run a few calls and check the CPU. > > > Also, when you said the normal is 120 simultaneous transcoding > > operations, what is "normal"? I have a P4 w/HT 3.4Ghz, 2GB RAM > > machine. Would that be above or below "normal"? > > > > Thanks much > > \R > > I would think that is above normal but not by much, I'm not sure what > "normal" was, nor can I find the Digium document where this was stated. > > It wasn't that long ago. > > I'm doing some more tests on a 3000 line setup (external DS3s via > Asterisk and SER clusters) at the moment which we are splitting to be > half G.729 and half ulaw, and I will try to post some results. > > - -- > Cheers, > > Matt Riddell > ___ > > http://www.sineapps.com/news.php (Daily Asterisk News - html) > http://wap.sineapps.com (Daily Asterisk News for your cellphone) > http://feeds.feedburner.com/AsteriskNews (Daily Asterisk News - rss) > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFFAHYFS6d5vy0jeVcRAluMAJ0du5Itu3Va1yAXu0+2gxMrC3JjLACePaTL > fdZacwEIEm4Z63ht6E/KrAY= > =DbHV > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Capacity for transcode G711 to G729
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mark Phillips wrote: > What tools are you using for this? > > I'm sure you are aware of SIPp but wondered if you had anything else? > > Mark For IAX2 internally we use a modified version of testcall from http://iaxclient.sf.net. Otherwise we just use SineDialer :) - -- Cheers, Matt Riddell ___ http://www.sineapps.com/news.php (Daily Asterisk News - html) http://wap.sineapps.com (Daily Asterisk News for your cellphone) http://feeds.feedburner.com/AsteriskNews (Daily Asterisk News - rss) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFAKzpS6d5vy0jeVcRAkH+AJ94GgSiYMFryK1mYtpstXaS5cmj0wCdET2F 5BABFzHxR9E1hLVEAPsAjRw= =c0yh -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Capacity for transcode G711 to G729
Hi Matt, The best use I have seen is the newly converted IAX2 which can use multithreading in version 1.4, the beta of which should be released later this week. The best idea would be to compile Asterisk, run some tests (show translation recalc 60) with HT turned on, restart the box, bring it up with HT turned off and try again. What's the best way to know for sure that you've everything setup the right way to use HT with Asterisk? There're so many things, I'm not quite sure if I am turning or conversely not turning enough things on/off. I do the following right now: - in /usr/src, I have the symlink of linux and linux-2.6 pointing to the location of the src of the smp kernel like e.g. /usr/src/kernels/2.6.9-34.0.1.EL-smp-i686 - Then do a fresh 'make' on asterisk with these symlinks in placehe - Then reboot and turn on HT in the BIOS - Then reboot with the smp kernel Is that it? If I compile with the linux/linux-2.6 symlink pointed to the kernel of the NON-smp kernel, then reboot in the non-smp kernel but leave HT turned on in the BIOS, does it matter? would that be enough? or should i turn off HT in the BIOS as well to avoid it causing issues? In my experiments with using (*) inside of a VM and doing SMP I'd seen that simply booting into an smp kernel gave me timing issues even when (*) was compiled against a non-smp kernel source. I don't see these problems on a real machine but that's just one call. Who knows what'll happen if I throw 100 at it. Would love to see the results of this test you're setting up. At the expense of bandwidth, maybe I'll just stick with g711 all the way through and save money on g729 licenses and load on my machine. Any thoughts on g726? Would using g726-32 be a good compromise on bandwidth and cpu power instead of g711 or g729? Thx \R ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
