On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Steve Totaro
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 11:59 PM, Sean Bright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Steve Totaro wrote:
>>> There must be a reason What is it?
>>
>> That is the question that *you* are being asked.
>>
>> A competing project is g
On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Steve Totaro
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 11:59 PM, Sean Bright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Steve Totaro wrote:
>>> There must be a reason What is it?
>>
>> That is the question that *you* are being asked.
>>
>> A competing project is g
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 11:59 PM, Sean Bright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve Totaro wrote:
>> There must be a reason What is it?
>
> That is the question that *you* are being asked.
>
> A competing project is getting better performance and you believe it has
> to do with locking. What spec
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 10:07:32AM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 9:08 AM, Stephen Davies
> > My curiosity is piqued to do a proper comparison of Asterisk and Freeswitch
> > with a realistic workload and compare results (and profile Asterisk if there
> > is a big difference.
>
On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 9:08 AM, Stephen Davies
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> 2008/7/6 Grey Man <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> From what I can gather the suggestion from the FS approach is that
>> each Asterisk channel should be handled after by it's own unique
>> thread and save the need for any loc
2008/7/6 Grey Man <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> From what I can gather the suggestion from the FS approach is that
> each Asterisk channel should be handled after by it's own unique
> thread and save the need for any locking on the channel data
> structures in the first place.
>
After a quick grep, the
On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 4:11 AM, Russell Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jul 5, 2008, at 7:59 PM, Grey Man wrote:
>
> Having a thread per channel _absolutely does NOT_ remove the need for
> locking to synchronize access to channel data structures.
>
It does if only one thread needs to acce
Steve Totaro wrote:
> There must be a reason What is it?
That is the question that *you* are being asked.
A competing project is getting better performance and you believe it has
to do with locking. What specific changes do you suggest making to the
locking infrastructure in Asterisk in ord
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 11:33 PM, Sean Bright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Russell Bryant wrote:
>>
>> You have yet to bring any useful discussion to the table.
>>
>
> If I were you, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for any, either :)
>
> --
> Sean Bright
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Sure I have. I have
Russell Bryant wrote:
>
> You have yet to bring any useful discussion to the table.
>
If I were you, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for any, either :)
--
Sean Bright
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-dig
On Jul 5, 2008, at 7:59 PM, Grey Man wrote:
> From what I can gather the suggestion from the FS approach is that
> each Asterisk channel should be handled after by it's own unique
> thread and save the need for any locking on the channel data
> structures in the first place.
Having a thread per
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 7:47 PM, Russell Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> If you want to talk about locking improvements, then I'm more than
> happy to talk about them. Naming an application is useless. Let's
> talk about the technical details that make one approach better than
> the other.
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Steve Totaro
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Michiel van Baak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 14:26, Sat 05 Jul 08, Steve Totaro wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Tilghman Lesher
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > On Friday 0
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Michiel van Baak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 14:26, Sat 05 Jul 08, Steve Totaro wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Tilghman Lesher
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Friday 04 July 2008 19:59:55 Steve Totaro wrote:
>> >> FreeSwitch will be the clear wi
On 14:26, Sat 05 Jul 08, Steve Totaro wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Tilghman Lesher
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Friday 04 July 2008 19:59:55 Steve Totaro wrote:
> >> FreeSwitch will be the clear winner, or at least the heart of large
> >> scale systems with a few Asterisk boxen
On Jul 5, 2008, at 2:26 PM, Steve Totaro wrote:
> Again, your ability to miss the point is astounding. I never said I
> was a Freeswitch fan boy. I am just suggesting using a similar method
> of locking with FreeSwitch.
>
> Ideas, obviously Digium doesn't care enough to listen to it's users.
I
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Tilghman Lesher
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 04 July 2008 19:59:55 Steve Totaro wrote:
>> FreeSwitch will be the clear winner, or at least the heart of large
>> scale systems with a few Asterisk boxen here and there until it
>> becomes more mature.
>
> If
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Tilghman Lesher
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 05 July 2008 04:24:19 Steve Totaro wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Tilghman Lesher
>>
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Friday 04 July 2008 19:59:55 Steve Totaro wrote:
>> >> FreeSwitch will be
On Saturday 05 July 2008 04:24:19 Steve Totaro wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Tilghman Lesher
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Friday 04 July 2008 19:59:55 Steve Totaro wrote:
> >> FreeSwitch will be the clear winner, or at least the heart of large
> >> scale systems with a few Aste
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Tilghman Lesher
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 04 July 2008 19:59:55 Steve Totaro wrote:
>> FreeSwitch will be the clear winner, or at least the heart of large
>> scale systems with a few Asterisk boxen here and there until it
>> becomes more mature.
>
> If
Hi
On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 08:59:55PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Tzafrir Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(in an off-list message)
> > On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 04:56:41PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Tzafrir Cohen <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Friday 04 July 2008 19:59:55 Steve Totaro wrote:
> FreeSwitch will be the clear winner, or at least the heart of large
> scale systems with a few Asterisk boxen here and there until it
> becomes more mature.
If you want to be a Freeswitch fanboy, that's fine, but please keep it off
this list.
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Tzafrir Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 04:56:41PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Tzafrir Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 02:25:59PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Call me
23 matches
Mail list logo
