I have found a site that list the following (no date in the post, so it may be old): "since all transcoding and calls still go through one core in asterisk, it doesn't make sense to buy a multi-core or hyperthreaded system that will only slow you down" Does that still applies in asterisk 1.2.14/1.4.x ? Or do we have to tweak source code to balance loads (transcoding,etc) between cores? -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Erick Perez Panama Sistemas Integradores de Telefonia IP y Soluciones Para Centros de Datos Panama, Republica de Panama Cel Panama. +(507) 6694-4780 ------------------------------------------------------------
Erick Perez wrote:> I have found a site that list the following (no date in the post, so > it may be old): > "since all transcoding and calls still go through one core in asterisk, > it doesn't make sense to buy a multi-core or hyperthreaded system that > will only slow you down" > > Does that still applies in asterisk 1.2.14/1.4.x ? > Or do we have to tweak source code to balance loads (transcoding,etc) > between cores? >I can tell you that statement is bogus. We run a number of dual cpu and single cpu systems on our network. The dual ones (Xeon 3.6Ghz) can easily handle 90 G729 calls at 50% CPU Usage. The single ones will be at 50% with only 40 calls. Andres
Matthew Rubenstein
2007-Feb-10 10:29 UTC
[asterisk-users] asterisk and multiple cpus/cores
Are there 45 G.729 instances for the 45 ZAP legs in addition to 45 G.729 instances for the 45 SIP legs? Or do the ZAP legs not get a codec (HW instead)? On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 12:06 -0500, Andres wrote:> Hi Matthew, > > Yes, those are really 90 SIP-ZAP calls. Which means the 4 port T1 is > pretty much full of calls. All SIP endpoints are forced to G729. And > as for your 125% question I really don't know why. This is just what I > can see from our MRTG graphs. We graph all CPU usage and SIP/ZAP > calls. All our servers are running Asterisk 1.2.9.1. > > Andres. > > > Matthew Rubenstein wrote: > > > Are those "90 calls" really 90 instances of the G.729 codec (+ other > >processing), 90 "legs" (people at phones) for 45 2-party calls? > > > > Also, how do you get 125% more CPU bandwidth by adding another CPU, > >which usually gets less than 100% more power after its overhead to > >function in the system? > > > > > >On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 04:46 -0700, > >asterisk-users-request@lists.digium.com wrote: > > > > > >>Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 21:57:23 -0500 > >>From: Andres <andres@telesip.net> > >>Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] asterisk and multiple cpus/cores > >>To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion > >> <asterisk-users@lists.digium.com> > >>Message-ID: <45CD3493.6000507@telesip.net> > >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > >> > >>Erick Perez wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>I have found a site that list the following (no date in the post, so > >>>it may be old): > >>>"since all transcoding and calls still go through one core in > >>> > >>> > >>asterisk, > >> > >> > >>>it doesn't make sense to buy a multi-core or hyperthreaded system > >>> > >>> > >>that > >> > >> > >>>will only slow you down" > >>> > >>>Does that still applies in asterisk 1.2.14/1.4.x ? > >>>Or do we have to tweak source code to balance loads > >>> > >>> > >>(transcoding,etc) > >> > >> > >>>between cores? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>I can tell you that statement is bogus. We run a number of dual cpu > >>and > >>single cpu systems on our network. The dual ones (Xeon 3.6Ghz) can > >>easily handle 90 G729 calls at 50% CPU Usage. The single ones will > >>be > >>at 50% with only 40 calls. > >> > >>Andres > >> > >> >-- (C) Matthew Rubenstein