I was browsing the applications developed in zaptel and came across zttest. After I run it, I get the following: Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.000000% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.000000% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% --- Results after 57 passes --- Best: 100.000000 -- Worst: 99.975586 -- Average: 99.987793 What does this mean? Should I have expected to get 100% across the board? This is from a TE410P running on Debian 2.6.11-1-686-smp on a dual Xeon 2.4GHz server. Thanks, Waldo
Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). Do you have issues with your * box? If so then I would start worrying about zttest output (and thinking about disabling hyper threading on those dual Xeons), otherwise have a smile and a beer and pity us poor fools who have had problems due to poor results. Cheers, Damian. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Waldo Rubinstein wrote:> I was browsing the applications developed in zaptel and came across > zttest. > > After I run it, I get the following: > > Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... > 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.000000% > 99.987793% > 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% > 99.987793% 99.975586% > 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% > 99.987793% 99.987793% > 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% > 99.987793% 99.987793% > 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% > 99.987793% 99.987793% > 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% > 99.987793% 99.987793% > 100.000000% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% > 99.987793% 99.987793% > 99.987793% 99.987793% > --- Results after 57 passes --- > Best: 100.000000 -- Worst: 99.975586 -- Average: 99.987793 > > What does this mean? Should I have expected to get 100% across the > board? > > This is from a TE410P running on Debian 2.6.11-1-686-smp on a dual > Xeon 2.4GHz server. > > Thanks, > Waldo > _______________________________________________ > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > > >
> After I run it, I get the following:> 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.000000% > 99.987793%Just for reference, I'm running a PIII-800Mhz and I get (with no particular load on CPU) -Best: 100.000000 -- Worst: 99.987793 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000% 100.000000%
> > How do you disable hyper threading (what's the command and where is it > placed)? >Hyper-threading is a BIOS feature available on some Pentium 4 & Xeon processors. If you have hyper-threading enabled your system may appear to have more processors than are physically in the system. Typically twice as many. You generally disable the hyperthreading feature through the BIOS setup program that's normally accessible when the system boots.
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> <title></title> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> this was posted before:<br> <pre wrap="">On 5/12/05, Colin Anderson <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ColinA@landmarkmasterbuilder.com"><ColinA@landmarkmasterbuilder.com></a> wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap=""><span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span> > They instantly got us to look at the output of zttest and we found that <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>this was (in their words) 'extremely low', with 'best' and > 'worst' <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>readings of 99.975586% and 99.963379% respectively. <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span> <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>Might want to give PCI latency setting a try, it helped for me. My ZTTEST <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>would drop occasionally to 99.95% until I set: <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span> <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>setpci -v -s 01:01.0 latency_timer=ff <--Digium PRI card <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>setpci -v -s 01:04:0 latency_timer=ff <--Digium 401 4 X FXS <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>setpci -v -s XX:XX:X latency_timer=0 <--1 entry for every other PCI card in <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>system from LSPCI output, modify XX:XX accordingly <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span> <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>Before setpci I would get best in ZTTEST at 99.987793% and worst ~ 99.95% <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span> <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>After setpci best is 100% and worst is 99.987793% consitient. <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span> <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>I use SpanDSP to recieve faxes and before faxes were garbled and now they <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>are OK (BTW, now recieving ~150 faxes a day 99.95% OK, so SpanDSP <b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>does<span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>work fine, you just have to set it up right. Ask me how.) <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span> <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>I put the setpci statements in /etc/rc.d/rc.local before my modprobes to the <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>Digium hardware and Asterisk startup. <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span> <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>I'm using a 4-way Netfinity FC2 * 1.0 stable <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span> <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>I dunno, maybe the community is being too hard on Digium about the design of <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>the card. I can understand their perpective, it's brutal to make a card that <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>has to have such tight tolerances and make it work acceptably on the huge <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>variation in white box hardware (or black box, in your case). There's a page <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>on the Wiki about motherboards that work well with installation notes but <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>that's pointless since motherboards are such a moving target. Even the <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>motherboard vendor screwing around with BIOS updates can invalidate that <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>information. </pre> </blockquote> <br> <br> Waldo Rubinstein escribió: <blockquote cite="midC639106E-F674-492D-B6E2-CA317C723017@trianet.net" type="cite">I was browsing the applications developed in zaptel and came across zttest. <br> <br> After I run it, I get the following: <br> <br> Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... <br> 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.000000% 99.987793% <br> 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% <br> 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% <br> 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% <br> 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% <br> 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% <br> 100.000000% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% <br> 99.987793% 99.987793% <br> --- Results after 57 passes --- <br> Best: 100.000000 -- Worst: 99.975586 -- Average: 99.987793 <br> <br> What does this mean? Should I have expected to get 100% across the board? <br> <br> This is from a TE410P running on Debian 2.6.11-1-686-smp on a dual Xeon 2.4GHz server. <br> <br> Thanks, <br> Waldo <br> _______________________________________________ <br> Asterisk-Users mailing list <br> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com">Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com</a> <br> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users</a> <br> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: <br> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users</a> <br> <br> <br> </blockquote> <br> </body> </html>
Hi, I just migrated my colinux to kernel 2.6.10. And I get really weird results (voice is just highly distorted slow noise). Here is zttest... Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... -799.853516% -799.951172% -800.329590% -799.755859% -799.951172% -799.804688% -799.987793% --- Results after 7 passes --- Best: 0.000000 -- Worst: -800.329590 ./ztspeed Count: 251671 I am running CVS-HEAD-05/17/05-16:23:07, with no TDM hardware at all Any idea of what could be wrong ? Yours, JeanHuguesRobert At 23:26 15/05/2005 -0400, you wrote:>I was browsing the applications developed in zaptel and came across >zttest. > >After I run it, I get the following: > >Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... >99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.000000% >99.987793% >99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% >99.987793% 99.975586% >99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% >99.987793% 99.987793% >99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% >99.987793% 99.987793% >99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% >99.987793% 99.987793% >99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% >99.987793% 99.987793% >100.000000% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% >99.987793% 99.987793% >99.987793% 99.987793% >--- Results after 57 passes --- >Best: 100.000000 -- Worst: 99.975586 -- Average: 99.987793 > >What does this mean? Should I have expected to get 100% across the >board? > >This is from a TE410P running on Debian 2.6.11-1-686-smp on a dual >Xeon 2.4GHz server. > >Thanks, >Waldo >_______________________________________________ >Asterisk-Users mailing list >Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users------------------------------------------------------------------------- Web: http://hdl.handle.net/1030.37/1.1 Phone: +33 (0) 4 92 27 74 17