Hi!
Fun question -- and a perfect use-case for the benchmark
<https://opensips.org/docs/modules/3.6.x/benchmark.html> module,
allowing you to find the precise answer to this question and also share
it with us!
While the dialplan uses a hash table to store its string-based rules,
unfortunately it seems to be hardcoded to *16* (???). Which means on 1M
records, you will get 62K on each bucket on average. Now, imagine doing
->next, ->next, ->next, etc. 62K times on each number lookup... So I
think performance will be decent since C lang is fast, but far from
ideal. The hash size should be /configurable/ /- /an excellent feature
request for people getting into OpenSIPS development.
OTOH, the sql_cacher uses cachedb_local to store/pull its keys, which
has a much wider hash size (IIRC, *1024* buckets). So I think it will
be visibly faster than dialplan when doing 1M lookups over 1M records.
Best regards,
On 03.05.2025 12:27, M S wrote:
How better is it to use a
for(i=0 to 1000000) {
if($sql_cached_value(c_features:disabled:$fU)<>NULL
|| $sql_cached_value(c_features:disabled:$rU)) {
send_reply(503);
}
}
instead of just a:
if(dp_translate($fU) || dp_translate($rU)) {
send_reply(503);
}
--
Liviu Chircu
www.opensips-solutions.com |www.siphub.com
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
