So you're saying that on any server and/or architecture the results
will be the same?
Doesn't seem very reasonable...
2010/8/14 Nikos Balkanas :
> Actually you have missed a couple of more emails. On fakesmpp submission I
> also posted results from a low-end Solaris 10 64bit box. Very similar to
Actually you have missed a couple of more emails. On fakesmpp submission I
also posted results from a low-end Solaris 10 64bit box. Very similar to the
results posted from the linux server. The averages seem pretty solid. So,
contrary to your beliefs, it is not giving out the wrong impression.
Actually you're wrong.
You would use the throughput directive if you want to restrict your throughput.
If you don't want to restrict it then you should not set it at all
(but you may receive throttling errors form the remote SMSC)
On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 1:42 AM, sangprabv wrote:
> You can use
You can use throughput directive :)
Beware of your telco policy, some telcos limit MT from us ;)
sangprabv
sangpr...@gmail.com
http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/
On Aug 14, 2010, at 1:33 AM, Ravindra Gupta // Viva wrote:
> Dear Team,
>
> Sorry for previous mail.
>
> I am using kannel 1
Ok, just saw on another thread where you got those values from, but
again, that's very system specific.
I guess you point was just to say that Kannel was not the issue for
his bottleneck, but saying "It can handle ~1000 MO/s, 750 MT/s
(internal DLRs) or 450 MT/s (DB DLRs)" may give the wrong impre
2010/8/13 Nikos Balkanas :
>
> It is unlikely that kannel is your bottleneck. It can handle ~1000 MO/s, 750
> MT/s (internal DLRs) or 450 MT/s (DB DLRs).
Just curious to know where do you get those values from...
What Kannel supports depends on your hardware and architecture
Hi,
It is unlikely that kannel is your bottleneck. It can handle ~1000 MO/s, 750
MT/s (internal DLRs) or 450 MT/s (DB DLRs). Compare that to 10-30 sms/s
throughput of most SMScs. If you still want a fater kannel try:
1) Make sure that you have the right indeces in your DB. Some DBs are faster
Hi,
Something looks off from your description. Have you checked bb access.log
timestamps, and they verify this delay?
If yes, please post detailed relevant bb logs of your errors to see if they
could be responsible. Does this happen with sms or just some? Tried sending
acouple to yourself to
Hi,
It certainly is feasible. Kannel supports all serial GSM modems, as well as
usb based, as long as suitable usb driver exists for them in the OS.
BR,
Nikos
- Original Message -
From: Threader Slash
To: Alvaro Cornejo
Cc: users@kannel.org
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 9:02 PM
Subje
Dear Team,
Sorry for previous mail.
I am using kannel 1.4.3 version.
Please inform me how to improve performance/Speed delivery in sms using
Kannel Server.
Which parameters we have use and improve efficiency for kennel server.
Give the suggestion
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Alvaro C
Hi Alvaro,
Actually, we already have this solution implemented using the
Centurion/Siemens Libraries (based on Java). But now, we think to use
Kannel, that we know to be based on C.
We are migrating the solution for long distance monitoring. It integrates
Sensors, Wirelless Modem, and PLC actuato
Hi
Kannel already has support for AT commands for sending/receiving sms
as well as modem initialization.
What exactly want you to do?
Regards
Alvaro
|-|
Envíe y Reciba Datos y mensaje
Hi Everybody..
I have a project to use AT commands in a CT65 Arm7 Siemens/Centurium modem.
It will be used as GSM for data transmission. Programming will be
impllemented using C/C++.
Could someone tell if it is feasible to use Kannel in this kind of
development?
Thanks.
ThreaderSlash
Hi
Extra information which might be useful. We are running v1.4.3. Not the SVN
version. Our smsc binds are using transceiver.
Regards,
-- Forwarded message --
From: brett skinner
Date: Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:30 PM
Subject: Slow submission from Kannel
To: Users
Hi users
I am
Alvaro, maybe he talked about SMPP 3.4 :)
Ravindra, please check userguide. There is throughput directive to speed up the
MT.
sangprabv
sangpr...@gmail.com
http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/
On Aug 13, 2010, at 8:26 PM, Alvaro Cornejo wrote:
> Hi
>
> I think you have not things clear yet
Hi users
I am not sure what is going. Kannel seems to be running quite slowly. Before
we submit a batch of SMS to Kannel we parse the status page for the queue
size. From the status page I am using:
*SMS: received 489 (0 queued), sent 0 (0 queued), store size -1*
It seemed to me that the *sent 0
Hi
I think you have not things clear yet. Please read the user guide.
There is no kannel version 3.4, the latest version is 1.4.3 plus the svn...
However kannel supports SMPP versions 3.3 and 3.4...
Regards
|
Dear Team,
I am using kennel 3.4 version.
Please inform me how to improve performance/Speed delivery in Kannel Server.
Which parameters we have use and improve efficiency for kennel server.
Give the suggestion
--
Incase of any further queries, Please feel free to mail me or contact me on
the nu
18 matches
Mail list logo
