Re: kannel performance
Then that's your problem. Smsbox doesn't resend the same MT under no circumstance and no configuration option. I think it is high time this thread terminates. BR, Nikos - (not Nikkos) - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 8:38 AM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi Nikkos, no my application is as simple php script which sends only once.it sends to 10 numbers.for some numbers request is added twice and rest with one. Br Daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Nothing wrong with kannel. Your application sends them twice. If in doubt check max detail smsbox logs. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 3:52 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi yes u r right is sb log. i wonder when i sent once why does it goes 2 times.does any wrong configuration causes this. i just tried to send 10 sms where for soem numbers his request added was seen twice. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: This is not bb access log, but smsbox access log. It doesn't prove anyting, except that you have sent twice the same SMS. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 10:17 AM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi Nikkos, Thanks again for ur time and support. I wil try with spool and fakesmsc and get back to you. but as usggested by you i had serious look at the logs and what makes sense to inform u is bellow findings. i m sending sms through http as bellow http://$kannelHost:$kannelPort/cgi-bin/sendsms?dlr=1dlr-mask=31dlr-url=$durlusername=$userNamepassword=$userPasswordfrom=$fromto=$totext=$msgsmsc=putty where $userName = daf; and $userPassword = daf; how ever in bearerbox access.log i see the folowing.for some numbers it adds send-SMS request added 2 times.and for other only once. bellow is an example where it is trying 2 times. 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:daf:daffodil 77.91.205.191 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:tester:daffodil 77.91.205.230 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' and u can see my config as bellow group=sendsms-user username=daf password=daf user-allow-ip= *.*.*.* # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://daf.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id=putty host=213.30.43.217 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=putty2 service-type=12664 address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=putty smsc-password=putty12664 connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsc.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 Br Daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, 1) Test sending 1 sms using fakesmsc, as to avoid costs. Check storage status at end. 2) Spool is generally faster and more real-time than file for storage. Depends on fs parameters. 3) Resubmission is a problem, since it implies that smsc is not sending ACKs back. However, since you have specified to wait for an ACK indefinitely, it shouldn't resend the same sms again. I am assuming you are using the SMPP smsc. Try on sending a few SMS (~5), comment out log-file in smsc group and turn bb logs to maximum detail. Watch for anything unusual, especially ACKs. Post relevant portions if you get any problems. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 8:44 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi nikkos, just to add more operator says that kannel is senindg submit_sm for same number multiple times. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find
Re: kannel performance
Hi Nikos, Thanks for ur time. i just wonder how it happens.any way i will check with this. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Then that's your problem. Smsbox doesn't resend the same MT under no circumstance and no configuration option. I think it is high time this thread terminates. BR, Nikos - (not Nikkos) - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 8:38 AM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi Nikkos, no my application is as simple php script which sends only once.it sends to 10 numbers.for some numbers request is added twice and rest with one. Br Daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Nothing wrong with kannel. Your application sends them twice. If in doubt check max detail smsbox logs. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 3:52 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi yes u r right is sb log. i wonder when i sent once why does it goes 2 times.does any wrong configuration causes this. i just tried to send 10 sms where for soem numbers his request added was seen twice. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: This is not bb access log, but smsbox access log. It doesn't prove anyting, except that you have sent twice the same SMS. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 10:17 AM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi Nikkos, Thanks again for ur time and support. I wil try with spool and fakesmsc and get back to you. but as usggested by you i had serious look at the logs and what makes sense to inform u is bellow findings. i m sending sms through http as bellow http://$kannelHost:$kannelPort/cgi-bin/sendsms?dlr=1dlr-mask=31dlr-url=$durlusername=$userNamepassword=$userPasswordfrom=$fromto=$totext=$msgsmsc=putty where $userName = daf; and $userPassword = daf; how ever in bearerbox access.log i see the folowing.for some numbers it adds send-SMS request added 2 times.and for other only once. bellow is an example where it is trying 2 times. 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:daf:daffodil 77.91.205.191 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:tester:daffodil 77.91.205.230 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' and u can see my config as bellow group=sendsms-user username=daf password=daf user-allow-ip= *.*.*.* # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://daf.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id=putty host=213.30.43.217 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=putty2 service-type=12664 address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=putty smsc-password=putty12664 connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsc.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 Br Daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, 1) Test sending 1 sms using fakesmsc, as to avoid costs. Check storage status at end. 2) Spool is generally faster and more real-time than file for storage. Depends on fs parameters. 3) Resubmission is a problem, since it implies that smsc is not sending ACKs back. However, since you have specified to wait for an ACK indefinitely, it shouldn't resend the same sms again. I am assuming you are using the SMPP smsc. Try on sending a few SMS (~5), comment out log-file in smsc group and turn bb logs to maximum detail. Watch for anything unusual, especially ACKs. Post relevant portions if you get any problems. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 8:44 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi nikkos, just to add more operator says that kannel is senindg submit_sm for same number multiple times. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010
Re: kannel performance
Hi yes u r right is sb log. i wonder when i sent once why does it goes 2 times.does any wrong configuration causes this. i just tried to send 10 sms where for soem numbers his request added was seen twice. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: This is not bb access log, but smsbox access log. It doesn't prove anyting, except that you have sent twice the same SMS. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 10:17 AM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi Nikkos, Thanks again for ur time and support. I wil try with spool and fakesmsc and get back to you. but as usggested by you i had serious look at the logs and what makes sense to inform u is bellow findings. i m sending sms through http as bellow http://$kannelHost:$kannelPort/cgi-bin/sendsms?dlr=1dlr-mask=31dlr-url=$durlusername=$userNamepassword=$userPasswordfrom=$fromto=$totext=$msgsmsc=putty where $userName = daf; and $userPassword = daf; how ever in bearerbox access.log i see the folowing.for some numbers it adds send-SMS request added 2 times.and for other only once. bellow is an example where it is trying 2 times. 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:daf:daffodil 77.91.205.191 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:tester:daffodil 77.91.205.230 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' and u can see my config as bellow group=sendsms-user username=daf password=daf user-allow-ip= *.*.*.* # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://daf.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id=putty host=213.30.43.217 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=putty2 service-type=12664 address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=putty smsc-password=putty12664 connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsc.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 Br Daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, 1) Test sending 1 sms using fakesmsc, as to avoid costs. Check storage status at end. 2) Spool is generally faster and more real-time than file for storage. Depends on fs parameters. 3) Resubmission is a problem, since it implies that smsc is not sending ACKs back. However, since you have specified to wait for an ACK indefinitely, it shouldn't resend the same sms again. I am assuming you are using the SMPP smsc. Try on sending a few SMS (~5), comment out log-file in smsc group and turn bb logs to maximum detail. Watch for anything unusual, especially ACKs. Post relevant portions if you get any problems. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 8:44 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi nikkos, just to add more operator says that kannel is senindg submit_sm for same number multiple times. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my bearerbox size keeps growing.can any one suggest or guide me where i m wrong. all sms are not reaching smsc provider. group = core admin-port=13000 admin-password=xxx status-password=xxx sms-resend-retry = 1 sms-resend-freq = 120 admin-allow-ip=*.*.*.* log-level= 3 log-file = /var/log/kannel/bearerbox.log smsbox-port=13001 wapbox-port=13002 wdp-interface-name=* store-file=/var/log/kannel/kannel.store # SMSC FAKE group = smsc smsc-id = A smsc = fake port = 1
Re: kannel performance
Nothing wrong with kannel. Your application sends them twice. If in doubt check max detail smsbox logs. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 3:52 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi yes u r right is sb log. i wonder when i sent once why does it goes 2 times.does any wrong configuration causes this. i just tried to send 10 sms where for soem numbers his request added was seen twice. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: This is not bb access log, but smsbox access log. It doesn't prove anyting, except that you have sent twice the same SMS. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 10:17 AM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi Nikkos, Thanks again for ur time and support. I wil try with spool and fakesmsc and get back to you. but as usggested by you i had serious look at the logs and what makes sense to inform u is bellow findings. i m sending sms through http as bellow http://$kannelHost:$kannelPort/cgi-bin/sendsms?dlr=1dlr-mask=31dlr-url=$durlusername=$userNamepassword=$userPasswordfrom=$fromto=$totext=$msgsmsc=putty where $userName = daf; and $userPassword = daf; how ever in bearerbox access.log i see the folowing.for some numbers it adds send-SMS request added 2 times.and for other only once. bellow is an example where it is trying 2 times. 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:daf:daffodil 77.91.205.191 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:tester:daffodil 77.91.205.230 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' and u can see my config as bellow group=sendsms-user username=daf password=daf user-allow-ip= *.*.*.* # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://daf.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id=putty host=213.30.43.217 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=putty2 service-type=12664 address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=putty smsc-password=putty12664 connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsc.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 Br Daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, 1) Test sending 1 sms using fakesmsc, as to avoid costs. Check storage status at end. 2) Spool is generally faster and more real-time than file for storage. Depends on fs parameters. 3) Resubmission is a problem, since it implies that smsc is not sending ACKs back. However, since you have specified to wait for an ACK indefinitely, it shouldn't resend the same sms again. I am assuming you are using the SMPP smsc. Try on sending a few SMS (~5), comment out log-file in smsc group and turn bb logs to maximum detail. Watch for anything unusual, especially ACKs. Post relevant portions if you get any problems. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 8:44 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi nikkos, just to add more operator says that kannel is senindg submit_sm for same number multiple times. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my bearerbox size keeps growing.can any one suggest or guide me where i m wrong. all sms are not reaching smsc provider. group = core admin-port=13000 admin-password=xxx status-password=xxx sms-resend-retry = 1 sms-resend-freq = 120 admin-allow-ip=*.*.*.* log-level= 3 log-file = /var/log/kannel/bearerbox.log smsbox-port=13001 wapbox-port=13002
Re: kannel performance
Hi Nikkos, no my application is as simple php script which sends only once.it sends to 10 numbers.for some numbers request is added twice and rest with one. Br Daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Nothing wrong with kannel. Your application sends them twice. If in doubt check max detail smsbox logs. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 3:52 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi yes u r right is sb log. i wonder when i sent once why does it goes 2 times.does any wrong configuration causes this. i just tried to send 10 sms where for soem numbers his request added was seen twice. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: This is not bb access log, but smsbox access log. It doesn't prove anyting, except that you have sent twice the same SMS. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 10:17 AM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi Nikkos, Thanks again for ur time and support. I wil try with spool and fakesmsc and get back to you. but as usggested by you i had serious look at the logs and what makes sense to inform u is bellow findings. i m sending sms through http as bellow http://$kannelHost:$kannelPort/cgi-bin/sendsms?dlr=1dlr-mask=31dlr-url=$durlusername=$userNamepassword=$userPasswordfrom=$fromto=$totext=$msgsmsc=putty where $userName = daf; and $userPassword = daf; how ever in bearerbox access.log i see the folowing.for some numbers it adds send-SMS request added 2 times.and for other only once. bellow is an example where it is trying 2 times. 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:daf:daffodil 77.91.205.191 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:tester:daffodil 77.91.205.230 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' and u can see my config as bellow group=sendsms-user username=daf password=daf user-allow-ip= *.*.*.* # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://daf.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id=putty host=213.30.43.217 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=putty2 service-type=12664 address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=putty smsc-password=putty12664 connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsc.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 Br Daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, 1) Test sending 1 sms using fakesmsc, as to avoid costs. Check storage status at end. 2) Spool is generally faster and more real-time than file for storage. Depends on fs parameters. 3) Resubmission is a problem, since it implies that smsc is not sending ACKs back. However, since you have specified to wait for an ACK indefinitely, it shouldn't resend the same sms again. I am assuming you are using the SMPP smsc. Try on sending a few SMS (~5), comment out log-file in smsc group and turn bb logs to maximum detail. Watch for anything unusual, especially ACKs. Post relevant portions if you get any problems. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 8:44 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi nikkos, just to add more operator says that kannel is senindg submit_sm for same number multiple times. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my
Re: kannel performance
Hi Nikkos, Thanks again for ur time and support. I wil try with spool and fakesmsc and get back to you. but as usggested by you i had serious look at the logs and what makes sense to inform u is bellow findings. i m sending sms through http as bellow http://$kannelHost:$kannelPort/cgi-bin/sendsms?dlr=1dlr-mask=31dlr-url=$durlusername=$userNamepassword=$userPasswordfrom=$fromto=$totext=$msgsmsc=putty where $userName = daf; and $userPassword = daf; how ever in bearerbox access.log i see the folowing.for some numbers it adds send-SMS request added 2 times.and for other only once. bellow is an example where it is trying 2 times. 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:daf:daffodil 77.91.205.191 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:tester:daffodil 77.91.205.230 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' and u can see my config as bellow group=sendsms-user username=daf password=daf user-allow-ip= *.*.*.* # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://daf.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id=putty host=213.30.43.217 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=putty2 service-type=12664 address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=putty smsc-password=putty12664 connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsc.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 Br Daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, 1) Test sending 1 sms using fakesmsc, as to avoid costs. Check storage status at end. 2) Spool is generally faster and more real-time than file for storage. Depends on fs parameters. 3) Resubmission is a problem, since it implies that smsc is not sending ACKs back. However, since you have specified to wait for an ACK indefinitely, it shouldn't resend the same sms again. I am assuming you are using the SMPP smsc. Try on sending a few SMS (~5), comment out log-file in smsc group and turn bb logs to maximum detail. Watch for anything unusual, especially ACKs. Post relevant portions if you get any problems. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 8:44 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi nikkos, just to add more operator says that kannel is senindg submit_sm for same number multiple times. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my bearerbox size keeps growing.can any one suggest or guide me where i m wrong. all sms are not reaching smsc provider. group = core admin-port=13000 admin-password=xxx status-password=xxx sms-resend-retry = 1 sms-resend-freq = 120 admin-allow-ip=*.*.*.* log-level= 3 log-file = /var/log/kannel/bearerbox.log smsbox-port=13001 wapbox-port=13002 wdp-interface-name=* store-file=/var/log/kannel/kannel.store # SMSC FAKE group = smsc smsc-id = A smsc = fake port = 1 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id= host=222.22.22.222 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=xxx service-type=xxx address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=xxx smsc-password=x connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/mylog.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc
Re: kannel performance
This is not bb access log, but smsbox access log. It doesn't prove anyting, except that you have sent twice the same SMS. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 10:17 AM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi Nikkos, Thanks again for ur time and support. I wil try with spool and fakesmsc and get back to you. but as usggested by you i had serious look at the logs and what makes sense to inform u is bellow findings. i m sending sms through http as bellow http://$kannelHost:$kannelPort/cgi-bin/sendsms?dlr=1dlr-mask=31dlr-url=$durlusername=$userNamepassword=$userPasswordfrom=$fromto=$totext=$msgsmsc=putty where $userName = daf; and $userPassword = daf; how ever in bearerbox access.log i see the folowing.for some numbers it adds send-SMS request added 2 times.and for other only once. bellow is an example where it is trying 2 times. 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:daf:daffodil 77.91.205.191 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' 2010-10-06 12:13:21 send-SMS request added - sender:tester:daffodil 77.91.205.230 target:351919582869 request: 'kannel is a beautifull world 2010-10-06 12:12:43' and u can see my config as bellow group=sendsms-user username=daf password=daf user-allow-ip= *.*.*.* # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://daf.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id=putty host=213.30.43.217 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=putty2 service-type=12664 address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=putty smsc-password=putty12664 connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsc.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 Br Daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, 1) Test sending 1 sms using fakesmsc, as to avoid costs. Check storage status at end. 2) Spool is generally faster and more real-time than file for storage. Depends on fs parameters. 3) Resubmission is a problem, since it implies that smsc is not sending ACKs back. However, since you have specified to wait for an ACK indefinitely, it shouldn't resend the same sms again. I am assuming you are using the SMPP smsc. Try on sending a few SMS (~5), comment out log-file in smsc group and turn bb logs to maximum detail. Watch for anything unusual, especially ACKs. Post relevant portions if you get any problems. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 8:44 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi nikkos, just to add more operator says that kannel is senindg submit_sm for same number multiple times. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my bearerbox size keeps growing.can any one suggest or guide me where i m wrong. all sms are not reaching smsc provider. group = core admin-port=13000 admin-password=xxx status-password=xxx sms-resend-retry = 1 sms-resend-freq = 120 admin-allow-ip=*.*.*.* log-level= 3 log-file = /var/log/kannel/bearerbox.log smsbox-port=13001 wapbox-port=13002 wdp-interface-name=* store-file=/var/log/kannel/kannel.store # SMSC FAKE group = smsc smsc-id = A smsc = fake port = 1 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id= host=222.22.22.222 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=xxx service-type=xxx address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=xxx smsc-password=x connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/mylog.log log-level=3
Re: kannel performance
Hi to add more i m using svn-r4845. Br daf dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my bearerbox size keeps growing.can any one suggest or guide me where i m wrong. all sms are not reaching smsc provider. group = core admin-port=13000 admin-password=xxx status-password=xxx sms-resend-retry = 1 sms-resend-freq = 120 admin-allow-ip=*.*.*.* log-level= 3 log-file = /var/log/kannel/bearerbox.log smsbox-port=13001 wapbox-port=13002 wdp-interface-name=* store-file=/var/log/kannel/kannel.store # SMSC FAKE group = smsc smsc-id = A smsc = fake port = 1 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id= host=222.22.22.222 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=xxx service-type=xxx address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=xxx smsc-password=x connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/mylog.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://mysite.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSBOX SETUP group = smsbox bearerbox-host=localhost sendsms-port=13013 sendsms-chars=0123456789+ global-sender=13013 log-file = /var/log/kannel/smsbox.log sendsms-url=/cgi-bin/sendsms http-request-retry=10 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsbox.log log-level=3 http-queue-delay=60 # SEND-SMS USERS group = sendsms-user username = tester password = foobar user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* concatenation = true forced-smsc = B group = sendsms-user username = playsms password = pwd user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # this sender is for Kannel relay testing (http_smsc) group = sendsms-user username = kannel password = rL4y user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* group = sms-service keyword = default get-url = http://mysite.com/url.php; max-messages = 0 omit-empty = true catch-all = true keyword=default Br Daf -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/kannel-performance-tp29914621p29914696.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: kannel performance
It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my bearerbox size keeps growing.can any one suggest or guide me where i m wrong. all sms are not reaching smsc provider. group = core admin-port=13000 admin-password=xxx status-password=xxx sms-resend-retry = 1 sms-resend-freq = 120 admin-allow-ip=*.*.*.* log-level= 3 log-file = /var/log/kannel/bearerbox.log smsbox-port=13001 wapbox-port=13002 wdp-interface-name=* store-file=/var/log/kannel/kannel.store # SMSC FAKE group = smsc smsc-id = A smsc = fake port = 1 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id= host=222.22.22.222 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=xxx service-type=xxx address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=xxx smsc-password=x connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/mylog.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://mysite.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSBOX SETUP group = smsbox bearerbox-host=localhost sendsms-port=13013 sendsms-chars=0123456789+ global-sender=13013 log-file = /var/log/kannel/smsbox.log sendsms-url=/cgi-bin/sendsms http-request-retry=10 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsbox.log log-level=3 http-queue-delay=60 # SEND-SMS USERS group = sendsms-user username = tester password = foobar user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* concatenation = true forced-smsc = B group = sendsms-user username = playsms password = pwd user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # this sender is for Kannel relay testing (http_smsc) group = sendsms-user username = kannel password = rL4y user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* group = sms-service keyword = default get-url = http://mysite.com/url.php; max-messages = 0 omit-empty = true catch-all = true keyword=default Br Daf -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/kannel-performance-tp29914621p29914621.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: kannel performance
Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my bearerbox size keeps growing.can any one suggest or guide me where i m wrong. all sms are not reaching smsc provider. group = core admin-port=13000 admin-password=xxx status-password=xxx sms-resend-retry = 1 sms-resend-freq = 120 admin-allow-ip=*.*.*.* log-level= 3 log-file = /var/log/kannel/bearerbox.log smsbox-port=13001 wapbox-port=13002 wdp-interface-name=* store-file=/var/log/kannel/kannel.store # SMSC FAKE group = smsc smsc-id = A smsc = fake port = 1 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id= host=222.22.22.222 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=xxx service-type=xxx address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=xxx smsc-password=x connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/mylog.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://mysite.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSBOX SETUP group = smsbox bearerbox-host=localhost sendsms-port=13013 sendsms-chars=0123456789+ global-sender=13013 log-file = /var/log/kannel/smsbox.log sendsms-url=/cgi-bin/sendsms http-request-retry=10 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsbox.log log-level=3 http-queue-delay=60 # SEND-SMS USERS group = sendsms-user username = tester password = foobar user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* concatenation = true forced-smsc = B group = sendsms-user username = playsms password = pwd user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # this sender is for Kannel relay testing (http_smsc) group = sendsms-user username = kannel password = rL4y user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* group = sms-service keyword = default get-url = http://mysite.com/url.php; max-messages = 0 omit-empty = true catch-all = true keyword=default Br Daf -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/kannel-performance-tp29914621p29914621.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: kannel performance
Hi nikos, thanks for ur reply. yes its not wise to set log levl =0 for such high load. do u think changing store-type to spool would solve the problem. smsc was active through out. i can not think of smsc having any prob.because smsc works well with nowsms.i called them and the reply was such. by the way did u find any prob in my configuration.? FYI i m using dlr internal and i have a script which takes care of updating database.i use mysql. i guess u can only help me like u allways did.i can not bellive its kannel prob.i will think that its my conf problem or may be better u can suggest. thanks for ur valuable time again. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my bearerbox size keeps growing.can any one suggest or guide me where i m wrong. all sms are not reaching smsc provider. group = core admin-port=13000 admin-password=xxx status-password=xxx sms-resend-retry = 1 sms-resend-freq = 120 admin-allow-ip=*.*.*.* log-level= 3 log-file = /var/log/kannel/bearerbox.log smsbox-port=13001 wapbox-port=13002 wdp-interface-name=* store-file=/var/log/kannel/kannel.store # SMSC FAKE group = smsc smsc-id = A smsc = fake port = 1 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id= host=222.22.22.222 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=xxx service-type=xxx address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=xxx smsc-password=x connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/mylog.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://mysite.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSBOX SETUP group = smsbox bearerbox-host=localhost sendsms-port=13013 sendsms-chars=0123456789+ global-sender=13013 log-file = /var/log/kannel/smsbox.log sendsms-url=/cgi-bin/sendsms http-request-retry=10 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsbox.log log-level=3 http-queue-delay=60 # SEND-SMS USERS group = sendsms-user username = tester password = foobar user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* concatenation = true forced-smsc = B group = sendsms-user username = playsms password = pwd user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # this sender is for Kannel relay testing (http_smsc) group = sendsms-user username = kannel password = rL4y user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* group = sms-service keyword = default get-url = http://mysite.com/url.php; max-messages = 0 omit-empty = true catch-all = true keyword=default Br Daf -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/kannel-performance-tp29914621p29914621.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/kannel-performance-tp29914621p29916835.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: kannel performance
hi nikos, forgot to add when i tried to send 300 sms it did work fine. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my bearerbox size keeps growing.can any one suggest or guide me where i m wrong. all sms are not reaching smsc provider. group = core admin-port=13000 admin-password=xxx status-password=xxx sms-resend-retry = 1 sms-resend-freq = 120 admin-allow-ip=*.*.*.* log-level= 3 log-file = /var/log/kannel/bearerbox.log smsbox-port=13001 wapbox-port=13002 wdp-interface-name=* store-file=/var/log/kannel/kannel.store # SMSC FAKE group = smsc smsc-id = A smsc = fake port = 1 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id= host=222.22.22.222 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=xxx service-type=xxx address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=xxx smsc-password=x connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/mylog.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://mysite.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSBOX SETUP group = smsbox bearerbox-host=localhost sendsms-port=13013 sendsms-chars=0123456789+ global-sender=13013 log-file = /var/log/kannel/smsbox.log sendsms-url=/cgi-bin/sendsms http-request-retry=10 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsbox.log log-level=3 http-queue-delay=60 # SEND-SMS USERS group = sendsms-user username = tester password = foobar user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* concatenation = true forced-smsc = B group = sendsms-user username = playsms password = pwd user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # this sender is for Kannel relay testing (http_smsc) group = sendsms-user username = kannel password = rL4y user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* group = sms-service keyword = default get-url = http://mysite.com/url.php; max-messages = 0 omit-empty = true catch-all = true keyword=default Br Daf -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/kannel-performance-tp29914621p29914621.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/kannel-performance-tp29914621p29916903.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: kannel performance
Hi nikkos, just to add more operator says that kannel is senindg submit_sm for same number multiple times. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my bearerbox size keeps growing.can any one suggest or guide me where i m wrong. all sms are not reaching smsc provider. group = core admin-port=13000 admin-password=xxx status-password=xxx sms-resend-retry = 1 sms-resend-freq = 120 admin-allow-ip=*.*.*.* log-level= 3 log-file = /var/log/kannel/bearerbox.log smsbox-port=13001 wapbox-port=13002 wdp-interface-name=* store-file=/var/log/kannel/kannel.store # SMSC FAKE group = smsc smsc-id = A smsc = fake port = 1 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id= host=222.22.22.222 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=xxx service-type=xxx address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=xxx smsc-password=x connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/mylog.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://mysite.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSBOX SETUP group = smsbox bearerbox-host=localhost sendsms-port=13013 sendsms-chars=0123456789+ global-sender=13013 log-file = /var/log/kannel/smsbox.log sendsms-url=/cgi-bin/sendsms http-request-retry=10 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsbox.log log-level=3 http-queue-delay=60 # SEND-SMS USERS group = sendsms-user username = tester password = foobar user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* concatenation = true forced-smsc = B group = sendsms-user username = playsms password = pwd user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # this sender is for Kannel relay testing (http_smsc) group = sendsms-user username = kannel password = rL4y user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* group = sms-service keyword = default get-url = http://mysite.com/url.php; max-messages = 0 omit-empty = true catch-all = true keyword=default Br Daf -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/kannel-performance-tp29914621p29914621.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/kannel-performance-tp29914621p29917030.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: kannel performance
Hi, 1) Test sending 1 sms using fakesmsc, as to avoid costs. Check storage status at end. 2) Spool is generally faster and more real-time than file for storage. Depends on fs parameters. 3) Resubmission is a problem, since it implies that smsc is not sending ACKs back. However, since you have specified to wait for an ACK indefinitely, it shouldn't resend the same sms again. I am assuming you are using the SMPP smsc. Try on sending a few SMS (~5), comment out log-file in smsc group and turn bb logs to maximum detail. Watch for anything unusual, especially ACKs. Post relevant portions if you get any problems. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com To: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 8:44 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance Hi nikkos, just to add more operator says that kannel is senindg submit_sm for same number multiple times. Br daf Nikos Balkanas wrote: Hi, I don't think it is practical to set log-level to 0 for 10k SMS :-( How does it behave when sending just a few messages? Try changing store-type to spool. Describe test conditions. Were all of your smsc active during tests? BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com To: dafodil neo.tu...@yahoo.com Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: kannel performance It would be helpful if you provide us your detailed log. Please set log-level to 0. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:54 PM, dafodil wrote: Hi List, Good Day. While stress testing with kannel i found the follwing.i was trying to send 10 k sms through HTTP/sendsms. storage internal queued grows to 230. kannel.store size keeps growing and now it seems to be 480,630,358. now i find a kannel.store.new is created with size more than 2000. my configuration are as bellow.I feel i have some wrong configuration. my provider does not have any problem and supports more than 100 sms/sec. my bearerbox size keeps growing.can any one suggest or guide me where i m wrong. all sms are not reaching smsc provider. group = core admin-port=13000 admin-password=xxx status-password=xxx sms-resend-retry = 1 sms-resend-freq = 120 admin-allow-ip=*.*.*.* log-level= 3 log-file = /var/log/kannel/bearerbox.log smsbox-port=13001 wapbox-port=13002 wdp-interface-name=* store-file=/var/log/kannel/kannel.store # SMSC FAKE group = smsc smsc-id = A smsc = fake port = 1 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc=smpp smsc-id= host=222.22.22.222 port=7677 transceiver-mode=true alt-charset=ISO-8859-1 msg-id-type=0x01 system-type=xxx service-type=xxx address-range= max-pending-submits=10 smsc-username=xxx smsc-password=x connect-allow-ip=*.*.*.* dest-addr-npi=1 dest-addr-ton=1 flow-control=0 log-file=/var/log/kannel/mylog.log log-level=3 wait-ack=120 wait-ack-expire=0x02 throughput=100 window=10 validityperiod = 10 # SMSC HTTP group = smsc smsc = http msg-id-type=0x01 smsc-id = C system-type = kannel smsc-username = tester smsc-password = foobar port = 13015 connect-allow-ip = *.*.*.* send-url = http://mysite.com:13013/cgi-bin/sendsms; # SMSBOX SETUP group = smsbox bearerbox-host=localhost sendsms-port=13013 sendsms-chars=0123456789+ global-sender=13013 log-file = /var/log/kannel/smsbox.log sendsms-url=/cgi-bin/sendsms http-request-retry=10 log-file=/var/log/kannel/smsbox.log log-level=3 http-queue-delay=60 # SEND-SMS USERS group = sendsms-user username = tester password = foobar user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* concatenation = true forced-smsc = B group = sendsms-user username = playsms password = pwd user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* # this sender is for Kannel relay testing (http_smsc) group = sendsms-user username = kannel password = rL4y user-allow-ip = *.*.*.* group = sms-service keyword = default get-url = http://mysite.com/url.php; max-messages = 0 omit-empty = true catch-all = true keyword=default Br Daf -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/kannel-performance-tp29914621p29914621.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/kannel-performance-tp29914621p29917030.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: Kannel performance benchmarking
Are you using sqlbox for DLR storage? And do not relay to smsbox? Then this could very well be because of un-acked messages in the bearerbox queue. There’s a patch available for that. == Rene From: sangprabv [mailto:sangpr...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, 10 August, 2010 23:21 To: Alejandro Guerrieri Cc: Rene Kluwen; brett skinner; Users Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Currently I apply bearerbox-sqlbox-smsbox and use mysql as my dlr engine. On Delll R710 Quadcore 2.2 Intel Xeon 16GB RAM it usually reduce to 5GB available memory in just 6 days and must be restarted to gain more memory. The server only used by Kannel. My daily traffics for that server is only 800 thousands MT/day. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 10, 2010, at 10:53 PM, Alejandro Guerrieri wrote: Are you completely _sure_ that it's held by Kannel and not the underlying OS? Linux doesn't free unused memory unless needed by other processes. Also, if you have in-memory DLR's or a huge retry queue, it could consume lots of memory. Unless you get OOM errors, I wouldn't be concerned by the amount of memory being used. Regards, Alex On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:26 PM, sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com wrote: Regarding this performance benchmarking. I still got memory problem. Kannel fails to release buffered or cached memory. Does anybody has tips to avoid this problem? Thanks. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 10, 2010, at 10:12 PM, Rene Kluwen wrote: Why don’t you try it on your own system. Test with a MyIsam table and with InnoDB. It will be easy to determine which one works faster for you. == Rene From: users-boun...@kannel.org [mailto:users-boun...@kannel.org] On Behalf Of brett skinner Sent: Tuesday, 10 August, 2010 11:56 To: Alejandro Guerrieri Cc: Users Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Thanks for your feedback. Guess it is the age old tao of computer science. Space vs Time, always space vs time. :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Oh yes, I read that blog quite frequently :) There's a lot of stuff to say about optimizing InnoDB, but it's definitely off-topic here and wouldn't fit on a single email of course. We've gone thru a series of optimization cycles on our platform and, with respect to Kannel, ended up using MyIsam for DLR's. We don't have any locking issues, the only detail is we need to be careful when expiring old entries to do it in small batches and not on peak hours. For the rest of our applications, except for small and mostly read-only tables, we use InnoDB and while seems slower when you do a couple of requests, it's a _lot_ faster if you are under heavy traffic because of the row locking instead of table locking. Anyway, there's no a one-size-fits-all solution and if you really need to sustain heavy traffic I'd recommend you do a lot of profiling and find the bottlenecks either on the DB and the rest of your platform. Regards, Alex On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:15 AM, brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Alex That is why I have chosen Innodb for the tables we use for the application that surround Kannel. MyISAM definitely beat Innodb out the box but Innodb does seem to be better in terms of the issues you have pointed out. The other thing that I have read is that Innodb is incredibly slow with the stock standard configuration. I read through the following blog and followed their advice which increased its performance quite drastically. http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/01/innodb-performance-optimization-basics/ If you have a moment you can give that a read. Or if you have any other good references please send them a long. I am still rather new to MySql. Thanks :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Well, if it weren't for the SELECT COUNT(*) slowness would be my preferred option here as well. Despite seeming slower at first (specially on small tables) InnoDB performs row-locking on index-based queries, which indeed improves things quite a bit on big tables with lots of simultaneous reads and writes. Regards, Alex 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Indeed. InnoDB is much slower overall compared to MyIsam. However, it has its use for some jobs (archive_logs, hot backups, etc.) The figures I gave were sustained rates simulated with a 1-SMS batch. Count was sufficient to reach sustainability and reproducibility, yet short enough to get results fast. When i submitted fakesmpp, I also released similar data from a 64bit Solaris 10 server. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com To: brett skinner ; users-boun...@kannel.org ; us...@kannel
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Hi Nikos Thanks for the extra information. What was the motivation for using MyISAM? My reading lead me to believe that MyISAM was not that well suited for interleaved reads and writes due to table locking which is why I opted to use InnoDB. From what I assumed about how Kannel worked is that reading/writing to the DLR table would be interleaved. I may be quite badly mistaken and might perhaps need to switch to MyISAM as a few others have recommended. In your opinion what should Kannel be able to handle sustained (assuming normal business hours)? And what should Kannel be able to burst to? I know some of these questions are a bit like how long is a piece of string but I really do value all and any of your feedback. Regards, 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Try valgrind in linux. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com To: Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Cc: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com; kannel users users@kannel.org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 3:35 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Yeah I understand that. But when the there is no traffic. Kannel doesn't release the cached or buffered memory it used. Do you have any solution? What command to list down or trace the memory usage by Kannel? So maybe we can investigate which function or module in Kannel is eating the memory. Thanks sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 11:19 PM, Nikos Balkanas wrote: No memory problems. It is reasonable that kannel will use more memory in higher traffic, since all queues are in memory, as long as it drops to nominal levels once the traffic is gone. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv To: brett skinner Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; kannel users Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 5:59 PM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos, Do you experience memory problem? In my case Kannel is eating the memory on high load traffics. I always need to restart the box to get more memory. I even give 3 on /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches but still Kannel eat the memory :( sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 9:42 PM, brett skinner wrote: Hi Nikos Out of curiosity can you go into more detail regarding what hardware you were running and your setup for MySql? Were you using Innodb or MyIsam. If you were using Innodb did you make any other configuration changes to MySql to accommodate Innodb. From the user guide it is implied that the bottle neck for Kannel is the number of messages that the SMSC can accommodate per second. Is this still the case? Regards, 2010/8/8 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Hi, I have run some benchmarking for a client using fakesmpp. Using the default service for MO's I got: MO's: 1400 SMS/s MT + DLRs (internal): 747 SMS/s MT + DLRs (MySql): 434 SMS/s BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: ha...@aeon.pk To: kannel users Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:22 PM Subject: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi, I am interested to know about the kannel performance benchmarking, especially in terms of speed (msgs/sec), MO or MT. I assume that multiple smsboxes does not have any effect over kannel performance, since the front-end talking to SMSC is the main bearerbox. What is the max speed that could be attained by kannel and/or bearerbox? Regards, Hamza
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Brett, The DLR engine uses SELECT COUNT(*) from the admin interface, which is painfully slow on InnoDB for moderately big tables. While InnoDB would theoretically be the best option, MyIsam performs quite better in this case. Regards, Alex BlackBerry de movistar, allí donde estés está tu oficin@ -Original Message- From: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com Sender: users-boun...@kannel.org Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:13:54 To: Usersusers@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos Thanks for the extra information. What was the motivation for using MyISAM? My reading lead me to believe that MyISAM was not that well suited for interleaved reads and writes due to table locking which is why I opted to use InnoDB. From what I assumed about how Kannel worked is that reading/writing to the DLR table would be interleaved. I may be quite badly mistaken and might perhaps need to switch to MyISAM as a few others have recommended. In your opinion what should Kannel be able to handle sustained (assuming normal business hours)? And what should Kannel be able to burst to? I know some of these questions are a bit like how long is a piece of string but I really do value all and any of your feedback. Regards, 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Try valgrind in linux. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com To: Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Cc: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com; kannel users users@kannel.org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 3:35 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Yeah I understand that. But when the there is no traffic. Kannel doesn't release the cached or buffered memory it used. Do you have any solution? What command to list down or trace the memory usage by Kannel? So maybe we can investigate which function or module in Kannel is eating the memory. Thanks sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 11:19 PM, Nikos Balkanas wrote: No memory problems. It is reasonable that kannel will use more memory in higher traffic, since all queues are in memory, as long as it drops to nominal levels once the traffic is gone. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv To: brett skinner Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; kannel users Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 5:59 PM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos, Do you experience memory problem? In my case Kannel is eating the memory on high load traffics. I always need to restart the box to get more memory. I even give 3 on /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches but still Kannel eat the memory :( sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 9:42 PM, brett skinner wrote: Hi Nikos Out of curiosity can you go into more detail regarding what hardware you were running and your setup for MySql? Were you using Innodb or MyIsam. If you were using Innodb did you make any other configuration changes to MySql to accommodate Innodb. From the user guide it is implied that the bottle neck for Kannel is the number of messages that the SMSC can accommodate per second. Is this still the case? Regards, 2010/8/8 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Hi, I have run some benchmarking for a client using fakesmpp. Using the default service for MO's I got: MO's: 1400 SMS/s MT + DLRs (internal): 747 SMS/s MT + DLRs (MySql): 434 SMS/s BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: ha...@aeon.pk To: kannel users Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:22 PM Subject: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi, I am interested to know about the kannel performance benchmarking, especially in terms of speed (msgs/sec), MO or MT. I assume that multiple smsboxes does not have any effect over kannel performance, since the front-end talking to SMSC is the main bearerbox. What is the max speed that could be attained by kannel and/or bearerbox? Regards, Hamza
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Indeed. InnoDB is much slower overall compared to MyIsam. However, it has its use for some jobs (archive_logs, hot backups, etc.) The figures I gave were sustained rates simulated with a 1-SMS batch. Count was sufficient to reach sustainability and reproducibility, yet short enough to get results fast. When i submitted fakesmpp, I also released similar data from a 64bit Solaris 10 server. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com To: brett skinner ; users-boun...@kannel.org ; us...@kannel. us...@kannel. Org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:21 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Brett, The DLR engine uses SELECT COUNT(*) from the admin interface, which is painfully slow on InnoDB for moderately big tables. While InnoDB would theoretically be the best option, MyIsam performs quite better in this case. Regards, Alex BlackBerry de movistar, allν donde estιs estα tu oficin@ From: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com Sender: users-boun...@kannel.org Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:13:54 +0200 To: Usersusers@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos Thanks for the extra information. What was the motivation for using MyISAM? My reading lead me to believe that MyISAM was not that well suited for interleaved reads and writes due to table locking which is why I opted to use InnoDB. From what I assumed about how Kannel worked is that reading/writing to the DLR table would be interleaved. I may be quite badly mistaken and might perhaps need to switch to MyISAM as a few others have recommended. In your opinion what should Kannel be able to handle sustained (assuming normal business hours)? And what should Kannel be able to burst to? I know some of these questions are a bit like how long is a piece of string but I really do value all and any of your feedback. Regards, 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Try valgrind in linux. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com To: Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Cc: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com; kannel users users@kannel.org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 3:35 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Yeah I understand that. But when the there is no traffic. Kannel doesn't release the cached or buffered memory it used. Do you have any solution? What command to list down or trace the memory usage by Kannel? So maybe we can investigate which function or module in Kannel is eating the memory. Thanks sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 11:19 PM, Nikos Balkanas wrote: No memory problems. It is reasonable that kannel will use more memory in higher traffic, since all queues are in memory, as long as it drops to nominal levels once the traffic is gone. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv To: brett skinner Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; kannel users Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 5:59 PM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos, Do you experience memory problem? In my case Kannel is eating the memory on high load traffics. I always need to restart the box to get more memory. I even give 3 on /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches but still Kannel eat the memory :( sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 9:42 PM, brett skinner wrote: Hi Nikos Out of curiosity can you go into more detail regarding what hardware you were running and your setup for MySql? Were you using Innodb or MyIsam. If you were using Innodb did you make any other configuration changes to MySql to accommodate Innodb. From the user guide it is implied that the bottle neck for Kannel is the number of messages that the SMSC can accommodate per second. Is this still the case? Regards, 2010/8/8 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Hi, I have run some benchmarking for a client using fakesmpp. Using the default service for MO's I got: MO's: 1400 SMS/s MT + DLRs (internal): 747 SMS/s MT + DLRs (MySql): 434 SMS/s BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: ha...@aeon.pk To: kannel users Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:22 PM Subject: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi, I am interested to know about the kannel performance benchmarking, especially in terms of speed (msgs/sec), MO or MT. I assume that multiple smsboxes does not have any effect over kannel performance, since the front-end talking to SMSC is the main bearerbox. What is the max speed that could be attained by kannel and/or bearerbox? Regards, Hamza
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Hi Alex That is why I have chosen Innodb for the tables we use for the application that surround Kannel. MyISAM definitely beat Innodb out the box but Innodb does seem to be better in terms of the issues you have pointed out. The other thing that I have read is that Innodb is incredibly slow with the stock standard configuration. I read through the following blog and followed their advice which increased its performance quite drastically. http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/01/innodb-performance-optimization-basics/ http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/01/innodb-performance-optimization-basics/If you have a moment you can give that a read. Or if you have any other good references please send them a long. I am still rather new to MySql. Thanks :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Well, if it weren't for the SELECT COUNT(*) slowness would be my preferred option here as well. Despite seeming slower at first (specially on small tables) InnoDB performs row-locking on index-based queries, which indeed improves things quite a bit on big tables with lots of simultaneous reads and writes. Regards, Alex 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Indeed. InnoDB is much slower overall compared to MyIsam. However, it has its use for some jobs (archive_logs, hot backups, etc.) The figures I gave were sustained rates simulated with a 1-SMS batch. Count was sufficient to reach sustainability and reproducibility, yet short enough to get results fast. When i submitted fakesmpp, I also released similar data from a 64bit Solaris 10 server. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com To: brett skinner ; users-boun...@kannel.org ; us...@kannel.users@Kannel.Org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:21 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Brett, The DLR engine uses SELECT COUNT(*) from the admin interface, which is painfully slow on InnoDB for moderately big tables. While InnoDB would theoretically be the best option, MyIsam performs quite better in this case. Regards, Alex BlackBerry de movistar, allν donde estιs estα tu oficin@ From: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com Sender: users-boun...@kannel.org Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:13:54 +0200 To: Usersusers@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos Thanks for the extra information. What was the motivation for using MyISAM? My reading lead me to believe that MyISAM was not that well suited for interleaved reads and writes due to table locking which is why I opted to use InnoDB. From what I assumed about how Kannel worked is that reading/writing to the DLR table would be interleaved. I may be quite badly mistaken and might perhaps need to switch to MyISAM as a few others have recommended. In your opinion what should Kannel be able to handle sustained (assuming normal business hours)? And what should Kannel be able to burst to? I know some of these questions are a bit like how long is a piece of string but I really do value all and any of your feedback. Regards, 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Try valgrind in linux. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com To: Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Cc: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com; kannel users users@kannel.org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 3:35 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Yeah I understand that. But when the there is no traffic. Kannel doesn't release the cached or buffered memory it used. Do you have any solution? What command to list down or trace the memory usage by Kannel? So maybe we can investigate which function or module in Kannel is eating the memory. Thanks sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 11:19 PM, Nikos Balkanas wrote: No memory problems. It is reasonable that kannel will use more memory in higher traffic, since all queues are in memory, as long as it drops to nominal levels once the traffic is gone. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv To: brett skinner Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; kannel users Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 5:59 PM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos, Do you experience memory problem? In my case Kannel is eating the memory on high load traffics. I always need to restart the box to get more memory. I even give 3 on /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches but still Kannel eat the memory :( sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 9:42 PM, brett skinner wrote: Hi Nikos Out of curiosity can you go into more detail regarding what hardware you were running and your setup for MySql? Were you using Innodb or MyIsam. If you were using Innodb did you make any other configuration changes to MySql to accommodate Innodb. From
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Well, if it weren't for the SELECT COUNT(*) slowness would be my preferred option here as well. Despite seeming slower at first (specially on small tables) InnoDB performs row-locking on index-based queries, which indeed improves things quite a bit on big tables with lots of simultaneous reads and writes. Regards, Alex 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Indeed. InnoDB is much slower overall compared to MyIsam. However, it has its use for some jobs (archive_logs, hot backups, etc.) The figures I gave were sustained rates simulated with a 1-SMS batch. Count was sufficient to reach sustainability and reproducibility, yet short enough to get results fast. When i submitted fakesmpp, I also released similar data from a 64bit Solaris 10 server. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com To: brett skinner ; users-boun...@kannel.org ; us...@kannel. Users@Kannel.Org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:21 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Brett, The DLR engine uses SELECT COUNT(*) from the admin interface, which is painfully slow on InnoDB for moderately big tables. While InnoDB would theoretically be the best option, MyIsam performs quite better in this case. Regards, Alex BlackBerry de movistar, allν donde estιs estα tu oficin@ From: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com Sender: users-boun...@kannel.org Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:13:54 +0200 To: Usersusers@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos Thanks for the extra information. What was the motivation for using MyISAM? My reading lead me to believe that MyISAM was not that well suited for interleaved reads and writes due to table locking which is why I opted to use InnoDB. From what I assumed about how Kannel worked is that reading/writing to the DLR table would be interleaved. I may be quite badly mistaken and might perhaps need to switch to MyISAM as a few others have recommended. In your opinion what should Kannel be able to handle sustained (assuming normal business hours)? And what should Kannel be able to burst to? I know some of these questions are a bit like how long is a piece of string but I really do value all and any of your feedback. Regards, 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Try valgrind in linux. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com To: Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Cc: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com; kannel users users@kannel.org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 3:35 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Yeah I understand that. But when the there is no traffic. Kannel doesn't release the cached or buffered memory it used. Do you have any solution? What command to list down or trace the memory usage by Kannel? So maybe we can investigate which function or module in Kannel is eating the memory. Thanks sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 11:19 PM, Nikos Balkanas wrote: No memory problems. It is reasonable that kannel will use more memory in higher traffic, since all queues are in memory, as long as it drops to nominal levels once the traffic is gone. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv To: brett skinner Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; kannel users Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 5:59 PM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos, Do you experience memory problem? In my case Kannel is eating the memory on high load traffics. I always need to restart the box to get more memory. I even give 3 on /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches but still Kannel eat the memory :( sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 9:42 PM, brett skinner wrote: Hi Nikos Out of curiosity can you go into more detail regarding what hardware you were running and your setup for MySql? Were you using Innodb or MyIsam. If you were using Innodb did you make any other configuration changes to MySql to accommodate Innodb. From the user guide it is implied that the bottle neck for Kannel is the number of messages that the SMSC can accommodate per second. Is this still the case? Regards, 2010/8/8 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Hi, I have run some benchmarking for a client using fakesmpp. Using the default service for MO's I got: MO's: 1400 SMS/s MT + DLRs (internal): 747 SMS/s MT + DLRs (MySql): 434 SMS/s BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: ha...@aeon.pk To: kannel users Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:22 PM Subject: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi, I am interested to know about the kannel performance benchmarking, especially in terms of speed (msgs/sec), MO or MT. I assume that multiple smsboxes does not have any effect over kannel performance, since the front-end talking to SMSC is the main bearerbox. What is the max speed that could be attained
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Oh yes, I read that blog quite frequently :) There's a lot of stuff to say about optimizing InnoDB, but it's definitely off-topic here and wouldn't fit on a single email of course. We've gone thru a series of optimization cycles on our platform and, with respect to Kannel, ended up using MyIsam for DLR's. We don't have any locking issues, the only detail is we need to be careful when expiring old entries to do it in small batches and not on peak hours. For the rest of our applications, except for small and mostly read-only tables, we use InnoDB and while seems slower when you do a couple of requests, it's a _lot_ faster if you are under heavy traffic because of the row locking instead of table locking. Anyway, there's no a one-size-fits-all solution and if you really need to sustain heavy traffic I'd recommend you do a lot of profiling and find the bottlenecks either on the DB and the rest of your platform. Regards, Alex On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:15 AM, brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.comwrote: Hi Alex That is why I have chosen Innodb for the tables we use for the application that surround Kannel. MyISAM definitely beat Innodb out the box but Innodb does seem to be better in terms of the issues you have pointed out. The other thing that I have read is that Innodb is incredibly slow with the stock standard configuration. I read through the following blog and followed their advice which increased its performance quite drastically. http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/01/innodb-performance-optimization-basics/ http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/01/innodb-performance-optimization-basics/If you have a moment you can give that a read. Or if you have any other good references please send them a long. I am still rather new to MySql. Thanks :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Well, if it weren't for the SELECT COUNT(*) slowness would be my preferred option here as well. Despite seeming slower at first (specially on small tables) InnoDB performs row-locking on index-based queries, which indeed improves things quite a bit on big tables with lots of simultaneous reads and writes. Regards, Alex 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Indeed. InnoDB is much slower overall compared to MyIsam. However, it has its use for some jobs (archive_logs, hot backups, etc.) The figures I gave were sustained rates simulated with a 1-SMS batch. Count was sufficient to reach sustainability and reproducibility, yet short enough to get results fast. When i submitted fakesmpp, I also released similar data from a 64bit Solaris 10 server. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com To: brett skinner ; users-boun...@kannel.org ; us...@kannel.users@Kannel.Org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:21 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Brett, The DLR engine uses SELECT COUNT(*) from the admin interface, which is painfully slow on InnoDB for moderately big tables. While InnoDB would theoretically be the best option, MyIsam performs quite better in this case. Regards, Alex BlackBerry de movistar, allν donde estιs estα tu oficin@ From: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com Sender: users-boun...@kannel.org Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:13:54 +0200 To: Usersusers@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos Thanks for the extra information. What was the motivation for using MyISAM? My reading lead me to believe that MyISAM was not that well suited for interleaved reads and writes due to table locking which is why I opted to use InnoDB. From what I assumed about how Kannel worked is that reading/writing to the DLR table would be interleaved. I may be quite badly mistaken and might perhaps need to switch to MyISAM as a few others have recommended. In your opinion what should Kannel be able to handle sustained (assuming normal business hours)? And what should Kannel be able to burst to? I know some of these questions are a bit like how long is a piece of string but I really do value all and any of your feedback. Regards, 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Try valgrind in linux. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com To: Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Cc: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com; kannel users users@kannel.org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 3:35 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Yeah I understand that. But when the there is no traffic. Kannel doesn't release the cached or buffered memory it used. Do you have any solution? What command to list down or trace the memory usage by Kannel? So maybe we can investigate which function or module in Kannel is eating the memory. Thanks sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 11:19 PM, Nikos Balkanas
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Thanks for your feedback. Guess it is the age old tao of computer science. Space vs Time, always space vs time. :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Oh yes, I read that blog quite frequently :) There's a lot of stuff to say about optimizing InnoDB, but it's definitely off-topic here and wouldn't fit on a single email of course. We've gone thru a series of optimization cycles on our platform and, with respect to Kannel, ended up using MyIsam for DLR's. We don't have any locking issues, the only detail is we need to be careful when expiring old entries to do it in small batches and not on peak hours. For the rest of our applications, except for small and mostly read-only tables, we use InnoDB and while seems slower when you do a couple of requests, it's a _lot_ faster if you are under heavy traffic because of the row locking instead of table locking. Anyway, there's no a one-size-fits-all solution and if you really need to sustain heavy traffic I'd recommend you do a lot of profiling and find the bottlenecks either on the DB and the rest of your platform. Regards, Alex On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:15 AM, brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Alex That is why I have chosen Innodb for the tables we use for the application that surround Kannel. MyISAM definitely beat Innodb out the box but Innodb does seem to be better in terms of the issues you have pointed out. The other thing that I have read is that Innodb is incredibly slow with the stock standard configuration. I read through the following blog and followed their advice which increased its performance quite drastically. http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/01/innodb-performance-optimization-basics/ http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/01/innodb-performance-optimization-basics/If you have a moment you can give that a read. Or if you have any other good references please send them a long. I am still rather new to MySql. Thanks :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Well, if it weren't for the SELECT COUNT(*) slowness would be my preferred option here as well. Despite seeming slower at first (specially on small tables) InnoDB performs row-locking on index-based queries, which indeed improves things quite a bit on big tables with lots of simultaneous reads and writes. Regards, Alex 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Indeed. InnoDB is much slower overall compared to MyIsam. However, it has its use for some jobs (archive_logs, hot backups, etc.) The figures I gave were sustained rates simulated with a 1-SMS batch. Count was sufficient to reach sustainability and reproducibility, yet short enough to get results fast. When i submitted fakesmpp, I also released similar data from a 64bit Solaris 10 server. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com To: brett skinner ; users-boun...@kannel.org ; us...@kannel.users@Kannel.Org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:21 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Brett, The DLR engine uses SELECT COUNT(*) from the admin interface, which is painfully slow on InnoDB for moderately big tables. While InnoDB would theoretically be the best option, MyIsam performs quite better in this case. Regards, Alex BlackBerry de movistar, allν donde estιs estα tu oficin@ From: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com Sender: users-boun...@kannel.org Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:13:54 +0200 To: Usersusers@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos Thanks for the extra information. What was the motivation for using MyISAM? My reading lead me to believe that MyISAM was not that well suited for interleaved reads and writes due to table locking which is why I opted to use InnoDB. From what I assumed about how Kannel worked is that reading/writing to the DLR table would be interleaved. I may be quite badly mistaken and might perhaps need to switch to MyISAM as a few others have recommended. In your opinion what should Kannel be able to handle sustained (assuming normal business hours)? And what should Kannel be able to burst to? I know some of these questions are a bit like how long is a piece of string but I really do value all and any of your feedback. Regards, 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Try valgrind in linux. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com To: Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Cc: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com; kannel users users@kannel.org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 3:35 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Yeah I understand that. But when the there is no traffic. Kannel doesn't release the cached or buffered memory it used. Do you have any solution? What command to list down or trace
RE: Kannel performance benchmarking
Why don’t you try it on your own system. Test with a MyIsam table and with InnoDB. It will be easy to determine which one works faster for you. == Rene From: users-boun...@kannel.org [mailto:users-boun...@kannel.org] On Behalf Of brett skinner Sent: Tuesday, 10 August, 2010 11:56 To: Alejandro Guerrieri Cc: Users Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Thanks for your feedback. Guess it is the age old tao of computer science. Space vs Time, always space vs time. :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Oh yes, I read that blog quite frequently :) There's a lot of stuff to say about optimizing InnoDB, but it's definitely off-topic here and wouldn't fit on a single email of course. We've gone thru a series of optimization cycles on our platform and, with respect to Kannel, ended up using MyIsam for DLR's. We don't have any locking issues, the only detail is we need to be careful when expiring old entries to do it in small batches and not on peak hours. For the rest of our applications, except for small and mostly read-only tables, we use InnoDB and while seems slower when you do a couple of requests, it's a _lot_ faster if you are under heavy traffic because of the row locking instead of table locking. Anyway, there's no a one-size-fits-all solution and if you really need to sustain heavy traffic I'd recommend you do a lot of profiling and find the bottlenecks either on the DB and the rest of your platform. Regards, Alex On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:15 AM, brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Alex That is why I have chosen Innodb for the tables we use for the application that surround Kannel. MyISAM definitely beat Innodb out the box but Innodb does seem to be better in terms of the issues you have pointed out. The other thing that I have read is that Innodb is incredibly slow with the stock standard configuration. I read through the following blog and followed their advice which increased its performance quite drastically. http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/01/innodb-performance-optimization-basics/ If you have a moment you can give that a read. Or if you have any other good references please send them a long. I am still rather new to MySql. Thanks :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Well, if it weren't for the SELECT COUNT(*) slowness would be my preferred option here as well. Despite seeming slower at first (specially on small tables) InnoDB performs row-locking on index-based queries, which indeed improves things quite a bit on big tables with lots of simultaneous reads and writes. Regards, Alex 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Indeed. InnoDB is much slower overall compared to MyIsam. However, it has its use for some jobs (archive_logs, hot backups, etc.) The figures I gave were sustained rates simulated with a 1-SMS batch. Count was sufficient to reach sustainability and reproducibility, yet short enough to get results fast. When i submitted fakesmpp, I also released similar data from a 64bit Solaris 10 server. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com To: brett skinner ; users-boun...@kannel.org ; us...@kannel. us...@kannel. Org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:21 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Brett, The DLR engine uses SELECT COUNT(*) from the admin interface, which is painfully slow on InnoDB for moderately big tables. While InnoDB would theoretically be the best option, MyIsam performs quite better in this case. Regards, Alex BlackBerry de movistar, allν donde estιs estα tu oficin@ From: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com Sender: users-boun...@kannel.org Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:13:54 +0200 To: Usersusers@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos Thanks for the extra information. What was the motivation for using MyISAM? My reading lead me to believe that MyISAM was not that well suited for interleaved reads and writes due to table locking which is why I opted to use InnoDB. From what I assumed about how Kannel worked is that reading/writing to the DLR table would be interleaved. I may be quite badly mistaken and might perhaps need to switch to MyISAM as a few others have recommended. In your opinion what should Kannel be able to handle sustained (assuming normal business hours)? And what should Kannel be able to burst to? I know some of these questions are a bit like how long is a piece of string but I really do value all and any of your feedback. Regards, 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Try valgrind in linux. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com To: Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Cc: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com; kannel users users
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Regarding this performance benchmarking. I still got memory problem. Kannel fails to release buffered or cached memory. Does anybody has tips to avoid this problem? Thanks. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 10, 2010, at 10:12 PM, Rene Kluwen wrote: Why don’t you try it on your own system. Test with a MyIsam table and with InnoDB. It will be easy to determine which one works faster for you. == Rene From: users-boun...@kannel.org [mailto:users-boun...@kannel.org] On Behalf Of brett skinner Sent: Tuesday, 10 August, 2010 11:56 To: Alejandro Guerrieri Cc: Users Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Thanks for your feedback. Guess it is the age old tao of computer science. Space vs Time, always space vs time. :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Oh yes, I read that blog quite frequently :) There's a lot of stuff to say about optimizing InnoDB, but it's definitely off-topic here and wouldn't fit on a single email of course. We've gone thru a series of optimization cycles on our platform and, with respect to Kannel, ended up using MyIsam for DLR's. We don't have any locking issues, the only detail is we need to be careful when expiring old entries to do it in small batches and not on peak hours. For the rest of our applications, except for small and mostly read-only tables, we use InnoDB and while seems slower when you do a couple of requests, it's a _lot_ faster if you are under heavy traffic because of the row locking instead of table locking. Anyway, there's no a one-size-fits-all solution and if you really need to sustain heavy traffic I'd recommend you do a lot of profiling and find the bottlenecks either on the DB and the rest of your platform. Regards, Alex On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:15 AM, brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Alex That is why I have chosen Innodb for the tables we use for the application that surround Kannel. MyISAM definitely beat Innodb out the box but Innodb does seem to be better in terms of the issues you have pointed out. The other thing that I have read is that Innodb is incredibly slow with the stock standard configuration. I read through the following blog and followed their advice which increased its performance quite drastically. http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/01/innodb-performance-optimization-basics/ If you have a moment you can give that a read. Or if you have any other good references please send them a long. I am still rather new to MySql. Thanks :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Well, if it weren't for the SELECT COUNT(*) slowness would be my preferred option here as well. Despite seeming slower at first (specially on small tables) InnoDB performs row-locking on index-based queries, which indeed improves things quite a bit on big tables with lots of simultaneous reads and writes. Regards, Alex 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Indeed. InnoDB is much slower overall compared to MyIsam. However, it has its use for some jobs (archive_logs, hot backups, etc.) The figures I gave were sustained rates simulated with a 1-SMS batch. Count was sufficient to reach sustainability and reproducibility, yet short enough to get results fast. When i submitted fakesmpp, I also released similar data from a 64bit Solaris 10 server. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com To: brett skinner ; users-boun...@kannel.org ; us...@kannel. us...@kannel. Org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:21 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Brett, The DLR engine uses SELECT COUNT(*) from the admin interface, which is painfully slow on InnoDB for moderately big tables. While InnoDB would theoretically be the best option, MyIsam performs quite better in this case. Regards, Alex BlackBerry de movistar, allν donde estιs estα tu oficin@ From: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com Sender: users-boun...@kannel.org Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:13:54 +0200 To: Usersusers@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos Thanks for the extra information. What was the motivation for using MyISAM? My reading lead me to believe that MyISAM was not that well suited for interleaved reads and writes due to table locking which is why I opted to use InnoDB. From what I assumed about how Kannel worked is that reading/writing to the DLR table would be interleaved. I may be quite badly mistaken and might perhaps need to switch to MyISAM as a few others have recommended. In your opinion what should Kannel be able to handle sustained (assuming normal business hours)? And what should Kannel be able to burst to? I know
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Are you completely _sure_ that it's held by Kannel and not the underlying OS? Linux doesn't free unused memory unless needed by other processes. Also, if you have in-memory DLR's or a huge retry queue, it could consume lots of memory. Unless you get OOM errors, I wouldn't be concerned by the amount of memory being used. Regards, Alex On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:26 PM, sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com wrote: Regarding this performance benchmarking. I still got memory problem. Kannel fails to release buffered or cached memory. Does anybody has tips to avoid this problem? Thanks. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 10, 2010, at 10:12 PM, Rene Kluwen wrote: Why don’t you try it on your own system. Test with a MyIsam table and with InnoDB. It will be easy to determine which one works faster for you. == Rene *From:* users-boun...@kannel.org [mailto:users-boun...@kannel.org] *On Behalf Of *brett skinner *Sent:* Tuesday, 10 August, 2010 11:56 *To:* Alejandro Guerrieri *Cc:* Users *Subject:* Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Thanks for your feedback. Guess it is the age old tao of computer science. Space vs Time, always space vs time. :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Oh yes, I read that blog quite frequently :) There's a lot of stuff to say about optimizing InnoDB, but it's definitely off-topic here and wouldn't fit on a single email of course. We've gone thru a series of optimization cycles on our platform and, with respect to Kannel, ended up using MyIsam for DLR's. We don't have any locking issues, the only detail is we need to be careful when expiring old entries to do it in small batches and not on peak hours. For the rest of our applications, except for small and mostly read-only tables, we use InnoDB and while seems slower when you do a couple of requests, it's a _lot_ faster if you are under heavy traffic because of the row locking instead of table locking. Anyway, there's no a one-size-fits-all solution and if you really need to sustain heavy traffic I'd recommend you do a lot of profiling and find the bottlenecks either on the DB and the rest of your platform. Regards, Alex On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:15 AM, brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Alex That is why I have chosen Innodb for the tables we use for the application that surround Kannel. MyISAM definitely beat Innodb out the box but Innodb does seem to be better in terms of the issues you have pointed out. The other thing that I have read is that Innodb is incredibly slow with the stock standard configuration. I read through the following blog and followed their advice which increased its performance quite drastically. http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/01/innodb-performance-optimization-basics/ If you have a moment you can give that a read. Or if you have any other good references please send them a long. I am still rather new to MySql. Thanks :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Well, if it weren't for the SELECT COUNT(*) slowness would be my preferred option here as well. Despite seeming slower at first (specially on small tables) InnoDB performs row-locking on index-based queries, which indeed improves things quite a bit on big tables with lots of simultaneous reads and writes. Regards, Alex 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Indeed. InnoDB is much slower overall compared to MyIsam. However, it has its use for some jobs (archive_logs, hot backups, etc.) The figures I gave were sustained rates simulated with a 1-SMS batch. Count was sufficient to reach sustainability and reproducibility, yet short enough to get results fast. When i submitted fakesmpp, I also released similar data from a 64bit Solaris 10 server. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com To: brett skinner ; users-boun...@kannel.org ; us...@kannel. Users@Kannel.Org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:21 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Brett, The DLR engine uses SELECT COUNT(*) from the admin interface, which is painfully slow on InnoDB for moderately big tables. While InnoDB would theoretically be the best option, MyIsam performs quite better in this case. Regards, Alex BlackBerry de movistar, allν donde estιs estα tu oficin@ From: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com Sender: users-boun...@kannel.org Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:13:54 +0200 To: Usersusers@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos Thanks for the extra information. What was the motivation for using MyISAM? My reading lead me to believe that MyISAM was not that well suited for interleaved reads and writes due to table locking which is why I opted to use InnoDB. From what I assumed about how Kannel
RE: Kannel performance benchmarking
It would be interesting to use valgrind over a period over those 6 days. On all the boxes (bearerbox-sqlbox-smsbox). == Rene From: sangprabv [mailto:sangpr...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, 10 August, 2010 23:21 To: Alejandro Guerrieri Cc: Rene Kluwen; brett skinner; Users Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Currently I apply bearerbox-sqlbox-smsbox and use mysql as my dlr engine. On Delll R710 Quadcore 2.2 Intel Xeon 16GB RAM it usually reduce to 5GB available memory in just 6 days and must be restarted to gain more memory. The server only used by Kannel. My daily traffics for that server is only 800 thousands MT/day. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 10, 2010, at 10:53 PM, Alejandro Guerrieri wrote: Are you completely _sure_ that it's held by Kannel and not the underlying OS? Linux doesn't free unused memory unless needed by other processes. Also, if you have in-memory DLR's or a huge retry queue, it could consume lots of memory. Unless you get OOM errors, I wouldn't be concerned by the amount of memory being used. Regards, Alex On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:26 PM, sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com wrote: Regarding this performance benchmarking. I still got memory problem. Kannel fails to release buffered or cached memory. Does anybody has tips to avoid this problem? Thanks. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 10, 2010, at 10:12 PM, Rene Kluwen wrote: Why don’t you try it on your own system. Test with a MyIsam table and with InnoDB. It will be easy to determine which one works faster for you. == Rene From: users-boun...@kannel.org [mailto:users-boun...@kannel.org] On Behalf Of brett skinner Sent: Tuesday, 10 August, 2010 11:56 To: Alejandro Guerrieri Cc: Users Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Thanks for your feedback. Guess it is the age old tao of computer science. Space vs Time, always space vs time. :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Oh yes, I read that blog quite frequently :) There's a lot of stuff to say about optimizing InnoDB, but it's definitely off-topic here and wouldn't fit on a single email of course. We've gone thru a series of optimization cycles on our platform and, with respect to Kannel, ended up using MyIsam for DLR's. We don't have any locking issues, the only detail is we need to be careful when expiring old entries to do it in small batches and not on peak hours. For the rest of our applications, except for small and mostly read-only tables, we use InnoDB and while seems slower when you do a couple of requests, it's a _lot_ faster if you are under heavy traffic because of the row locking instead of table locking. Anyway, there's no a one-size-fits-all solution and if you really need to sustain heavy traffic I'd recommend you do a lot of profiling and find the bottlenecks either on the DB and the rest of your platform. Regards, Alex On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:15 AM, brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Alex That is why I have chosen Innodb for the tables we use for the application that surround Kannel. MyISAM definitely beat Innodb out the box but Innodb does seem to be better in terms of the issues you have pointed out. The other thing that I have read is that Innodb is incredibly slow with the stock standard configuration. I read through the following blog and followed their advice which increased its performance quite drastically. http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/01/innodb-performance-optimization-basics/ If you have a moment you can give that a read. Or if you have any other good references please send them a long. I am still rather new to MySql. Thanks :) Regards, On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com wrote: Well, if it weren't for the SELECT COUNT(*) slowness would be my preferred option here as well. Despite seeming slower at first (specially on small tables) InnoDB performs row-locking on index-based queries, which indeed improves things quite a bit on big tables with lots of simultaneous reads and writes. Regards, Alex 2010/8/10 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Indeed. InnoDB is much slower overall compared to MyIsam. However, it has its use for some jobs (archive_logs, hot backups, etc.) The figures I gave were sustained rates simulated with a 1-SMS batch. Count was sufficient to reach sustainability and reproducibility, yet short enough to get results fast. When i submitted fakesmpp, I also released similar data from a 64bit Solaris 10 server. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com To: brett skinner ; users-boun...@kannel.org ; us...@kannel. us...@kannel. Org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:21 AM Subject: Re
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Hi Nikos, Do you experience memory problem? In my case Kannel is eating the memory on high load traffics. I always need to restart the box to get more memory. I even give 3 on /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches but still Kannel eat the memory :( sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 9:42 PM, brett skinner wrote: Hi Nikos Out of curiosity can you go into more detail regarding what hardware you were running and your setup for MySql? Were you using Innodb or MyIsam. If you were using Innodb did you make any other configuration changes to MySql to accommodate Innodb. From the user guide it is implied that the bottle neck for Kannel is the number of messages that the SMSC can accommodate per second. Is this still the case? Regards, 2010/8/8 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Hi, I have run some benchmarking for a client using fakesmpp. Using the default service for MO's I got: MO's: 1400 SMS/s MT + DLRs (internal): 747 SMS/s MT + DLRs (MySql): 434 SMS/s BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: ha...@aeon.pk To: kannel users Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:22 PM Subject: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi, I am interested to know about the kannel performance benchmarking, especially in terms of speed (msgs/sec), MO or MT. I assume that multiple smsboxes does not have any effect over kannel performance, since the front-end talking to SMSC is the main bearerbox. What is the max speed that could be attained by kannel and/or bearerbox? Regards, Hamza
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Hi, Server was 64bit Ubuntu system, kernel 2.6.31-22. Dual core Xeon @3.4GHz. 4 GB RAM. MyIsam Mysql, with index on ts,smsc. You may have to adjust this if using latest svn with EMI or CIMD2 connections. Interestingly, SQLbox, performed the same as smsbox in MT with DB for DLRs. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: brett skinner To: Nikos Balkanas Cc: ha...@aeon.pk ; kannel users Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 5:42 PM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos Out of curiosity can you go into more detail regarding what hardware you were running and your setup for MySql? Were you using Innodb or MyIsam. If you were using Innodb did you make any other configuration changes to MySql to accommodate Innodb. From the user guide it is implied that the bottle neck for Kannel is the number of messages that the SMSC can accommodate per second. Is this still the case? Regards, 2010/8/8 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Hi, I have run some benchmarking for a client using fakesmpp. Using the default service for MO's I got: MO's: 1400 SMS/s MT + DLRs (internal): 747 SMS/s MT + DLRs (MySql): 434 SMS/s BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: ha...@aeon.pk To: kannel users Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:22 PM Subject: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi, I am interested to know about the kannel performance benchmarking, especially in terms of speed (msgs/sec), MO or MT. I assume that multiple smsboxes does not have any effect over kannel performance, since the front-end talking to SMSC is the main bearerbox. What is the max speed that could be attained by kannel and/or bearerbox? Regards, Hamza
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
No memory problems. It is reasonable that kannel will use more memory in higher traffic, since all queues are in memory, as long as it drops to nominal levels once the traffic is gone. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv To: brett skinner Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; kannel users Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 5:59 PM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos, Do you experience memory problem? In my case Kannel is eating the memory on high load traffics. I always need to restart the box to get more memory. I even give 3 on /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches but still Kannel eat the memory :( sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 9:42 PM, brett skinner wrote: Hi Nikos Out of curiosity can you go into more detail regarding what hardware you were running and your setup for MySql? Were you using Innodb or MyIsam. If you were using Innodb did you make any other configuration changes to MySql to accommodate Innodb. From the user guide it is implied that the bottle neck for Kannel is the number of messages that the SMSC can accommodate per second. Is this still the case? Regards, 2010/8/8 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Hi, I have run some benchmarking for a client using fakesmpp. Using the default service for MO's I got: MO's: 1400 SMS/s MT + DLRs (internal): 747 SMS/s MT + DLRs (MySql): 434 SMS/s BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: ha...@aeon.pk To: kannel users Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:22 PM Subject: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi, I am interested to know about the kannel performance benchmarking, especially in terms of speed (msgs/sec), MO or MT. I assume that multiple smsboxes does not have any effect over kannel performance, since the front-end talking to SMSC is the main bearerbox. What is the max speed that could be attained by kannel and/or bearerbox? Regards, Hamza
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Try valgrind in linux. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com To: Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Cc: brett skinner tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com; kannel users users@kannel.org Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 3:35 AM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Yeah I understand that. But when the there is no traffic. Kannel doesn't release the cached or buffered memory it used. Do you have any solution? What command to list down or trace the memory usage by Kannel? So maybe we can investigate which function or module in Kannel is eating the memory. Thanks sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 11:19 PM, Nikos Balkanas wrote: No memory problems. It is reasonable that kannel will use more memory in higher traffic, since all queues are in memory, as long as it drops to nominal levels once the traffic is gone. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv To: brett skinner Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; kannel users Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 5:59 PM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos, Do you experience memory problem? In my case Kannel is eating the memory on high load traffics. I always need to restart the box to get more memory. I even give 3 on /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches but still Kannel eat the memory :( sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 9:42 PM, brett skinner wrote: Hi Nikos Out of curiosity can you go into more detail regarding what hardware you were running and your setup for MySql? Were you using Innodb or MyIsam. If you were using Innodb did you make any other configuration changes to MySql to accommodate Innodb. From the user guide it is implied that the bottle neck for Kannel is the number of messages that the SMSC can accommodate per second. Is this still the case? Regards, 2010/8/8 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Hi, I have run some benchmarking for a client using fakesmpp. Using the default service for MO's I got: MO's: 1400 SMS/s MT + DLRs (internal): 747 SMS/s MT + DLRs (MySql): 434 SMS/s BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: ha...@aeon.pk To: kannel users Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:22 PM Subject: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi, I am interested to know about the kannel performance benchmarking, especially in terms of speed (msgs/sec), MO or MT. I assume that multiple smsboxes does not have any effect over kannel performance, since the front-end talking to SMSC is the main bearerbox. What is the max speed that could be attained by kannel and/or bearerbox? Regards, Hamza
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Yeah I understand that. But when the there is no traffic. Kannel doesn't release the cached or buffered memory it used. Do you have any solution? What command to list down or trace the memory usage by Kannel? So maybe we can investigate which function or module in Kannel is eating the memory. Thanks sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 11:19 PM, Nikos Balkanas wrote: No memory problems. It is reasonable that kannel will use more memory in higher traffic, since all queues are in memory, as long as it drops to nominal levels once the traffic is gone. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: sangprabv To: brett skinner Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; kannel users Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 5:59 PM Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi Nikos, Do you experience memory problem? In my case Kannel is eating the memory on high load traffics. I always need to restart the box to get more memory. I even give 3 on /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches but still Kannel eat the memory :( sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/ On Aug 9, 2010, at 9:42 PM, brett skinner wrote: Hi Nikos Out of curiosity can you go into more detail regarding what hardware you were running and your setup for MySql? Were you using Innodb or MyIsam. If you were using Innodb did you make any other configuration changes to MySql to accommodate Innodb. From the user guide it is implied that the bottle neck for Kannel is the number of messages that the SMSC can accommodate per second. Is this still the case? Regards, 2010/8/8 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Hi, I have run some benchmarking for a client using fakesmpp. Using the default service for MO's I got: MO's: 1400 SMS/s MT + DLRs (internal): 747 SMS/s MT + DLRs (MySql): 434 SMS/s BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: ha...@aeon.pk To: kannel users Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:22 PM Subject: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi, I am interested to know about the kannel performance benchmarking, especially in terms of speed (msgs/sec), MO or MT. I assume that multiple smsboxes does not have any effect over kannel performance, since the front-end talking to SMSC is the main bearerbox. What is the max speed that could be attained by kannel and/or bearerbox? Regards, Hamza
Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Hi, I have run some benchmarking for a client using fakesmpp. Using the default service for MO's I got: MO's: 1400 SMS/s MT + DLRs (internal): 747 SMS/s MT + DLRs (MySql): 434 SMS/s BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: ha...@aeon.pk To: kannel users Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:22 PM Subject: Kannel performance benchmarking Hi, I am interested to know about the kannel performance benchmarking, especially in terms of speed (msgs/sec), MO or MT. I assume that multiple smsboxes does not have any effect over kannel performance, since the front-end talking to SMSC is the main bearerbox. What is the max speed that could be attained by kannel and/or bearerbox? Regards, Hamza
Re: Kannel performance
Hi
After adding eaccelerator to my server, i got speed boost about 2-3
times, now its about 1500 SMS/minute.
Checking /server-status under heavy load i see that apache has about
10-15 requests in process and
13-16 free idle workers all the time.
Kannel keep-alive has been switched off by me (recompiling Kannel with
KEEP-ALIVE disabled in http.c)
because at least in 1.2.1 i kept having System error : too many open
files with keep-alive enabled.
Kannel and Apache are in same server, server load then testing is about
50%-60%.
Server itself is 2 Xeon processors with 4GB memory and RAID controller
with cache.
Illimar
Hi Illimar,
as you say the throughput remains the same no matter what apache is
doing, my quess is that your apache2 config is limited with a
specific allowed client connection value. So Kannel's smsbox will open
up that many connections to pipeline the requests to apache2, but it
will hit to it's configured limit.
My suggestion:
Check apache's /server-status URI and see how many concurrent
connections it handles when under load, then check apache's config to
confirm it the limiting factor ;) ... I'm almost certain this is the
place to look at.
Stipe
---
Kölner Landstrasse 419
40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
tolj.org system architecture Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
http://www.tolj.org/ http://www.kannel.org/
mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
---
Re: Kannel performance
Hi
After adding eaccelerator to my server, i got speed boost about 2-3
times, now its about 1500 SMS/minute.
Checking /server-status under heavy load i see that apache has about
10-15 requests in process and
13-16 free idle workers all the time.
Kannel keep-alive has been switched off by me (recompiling Kannel with
KEEP-ALIVE disabled in http.c)
because at least in 1.2.1 i kept having System error : too many open
files with keep-alive enabled.
Kannel and Apache are in same server, server load then testing is about
50%-60%.
Server itself is 2 Xeon processors with 4GB memory and RAID controller
with cache.
Illimar
Hi Illimar,
as you say the throughput remains the same no matter what apache is
doing, my quess is that your apache2 config is limited with a
specific allowed client connection value. So Kannel's smsbox will open
up that many connections to pipeline the requests to apache2, but it
will hit to it's configured limit.
My suggestion:
Check apache's /server-status URI and see how many concurrent
connections it handles when under load, then check apache's config to
confirm it the limiting factor ;) ... I'm almost certain this is the
place to look at.
Stipe
---
Kölner Landstrasse 419
40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
tolj.org system architecture Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
http://www.tolj.org/ http://www.kannel.org/
mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
---
Re: Kannel performance
Hi! First try to test only apache performance without kannel. At least you'll be sure if it's apache+php problem or something else. Some ideas (mostly about apache and php tuning): 1. Use eaccelerator to increase performance of PHP scripts. 2. Try to use some lightweight HTTP daemon (lighttpd or nginx). 3. Check if kannel uses keepalives for HTTP based services (I'm not sure if it's possible). Also question: are both kannel and apache running on the same server? Illimar Reinbusch - Telejazz.com wrote: Hi Im testing Kannel performance using fakesmsc. I have set-up three fake connections and im sending 20 000 SMS per connection and kannel receives them in speed 2000 SMS/sec per connection and stores the messages in Kannel buffer. Now i have Apache2 server with PHP scripts that do the SMS logic and reply to kannel. I get about 600 sms/min speed both Kannel-Apache and Apache-Kannel direction, theres no difference what PHP script does, just empty echo haha or big sql queries, i still get the same speed. Any advice how to speed up the process? Illimar -- Michael Bochkaryov
RE: Kannel performance
Hello, Could you be more precise on the test environnement? Are you using mysql in both? It could depend as well how you are coding your database request. If you are asking for all the fields of each record or not Many things to explain before we could advice if the issue is from kannel or not! Hope it helps Regards -Original Message- From: Illimar Reinbusch - Telejazz.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: mercredi 13 février 2008 04:55 To: users@kannel.org Subject: Kannel performance Hi Im testing Kannel performance using fakesmsc. I have set-up three fake connections and im sending 20 000 SMS per connection and kannel receives them in speed 2000 SMS/sec per connection and stores the messages in Kannel buffer. Now i have Apache2 server with PHP scripts that do the SMS logic and reply to kannel. I get about 600 sms/min speed both Kannel-Apache and Apache-Kannel direction, theres no difference what PHP script does, just empty echo haha or big sql queries, i still get the same speed. Any advice how to speed up the process? Illimar _ Antivirus avast! http://www.avast.com : message Sortant sain. Base de donnees virale (VPS) : 080213-0, 13/02/2008 Analyse le : 13/02/2008 14:43:46 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software.
Re: Kannel performance
Illimar Reinbusch - Telejazz.com schrieb:
Hi
Im testing Kannel performance using fakesmsc.
I have set-up three fake connections and im sending 20 000 SMS per
connection
and kannel receives them in speed 2000 SMS/sec per connection and stores
the
messages in Kannel buffer.
Now i have Apache2 server with PHP scripts that do the SMS logic and reply
to kannel.
I get about 600 sms/min speed both Kannel-Apache and Apache-Kannel
direction, theres no difference what PHP script does, just empty echo
haha
or big sql queries, i still get the same speed.
Any advice how to speed up the process?
Hi Illimar,
as you say the throughput remains the same no matter what apache is doing, my
quess is that your apache2 config is limited with a specific allowed client
connection value. So Kannel's smsbox will open up that many connections to
pipeline the requests to apache2, but it will hit to it's configured limit.
My suggestion:
Check apache's /server-status URI and see how many concurrent connections it
handles when under load, then check apache's config to confirm it the limiting
factor ;) ... I'm almost certain this is the place to look at.
Stipe
---
Kölner Landstrasse 419
40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
tolj.org system architecture Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
http://www.tolj.org/ http://www.kannel.org/
mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
---
Re: Kannel performance
Michael Bochkaryov schrieb:
Hi!
First try to test only apache performance without kannel.
At least you'll be sure if it's apache+php problem or something else.
Some ideas (mostly about apache and php tuning):
1. Use eaccelerator to increase performance of PHP scripts.
2. Try to use some lightweight HTTP daemon (lighttpd or nginx).
3. Check if kannel uses keepalives for HTTP based services (I'm not sure
if it's possible).
Kannel does HTTP/1.1 keep-alives.
Stipe
---
Kölner Landstrasse 419
40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
tolj.org system architecture Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
http://www.tolj.org/ http://www.kannel.org/
mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
---
Re: Kannel performance
Can you share your conf files for kannel and apache so we can help you test?
/Garth
On Feb 13, 2008 3:32 PM, Stipe Tolj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Bochkaryov schrieb:
Hi!
First try to test only apache performance without kannel.
At least you'll be sure if it's apache+php problem or something else.
Some ideas (mostly about apache and php tuning):
1. Use eaccelerator to increase performance of PHP scripts.
2. Try to use some lightweight HTTP daemon (lighttpd or nginx).
3. Check if kannel uses keepalives for HTTP based services (I'm not sure
if it's possible).
Kannel does HTTP/1.1 keep-alives.
Stipe
---
Kölner Landstrasse 419
40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
tolj.org system architecture Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
http://www.tolj.org/ http://www.kannel.org/
mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
---
