Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "Desktop integration"
2006 Nov 13
3
FW: Desktop integration
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000066">
Hi Dean,<br>
<br>
I will check that site - thanks for the hint.<br>
The biggest problem I see with
2018 Mar 14
2
Expected performance for WORM scenario
We can't stick to single server because the law. Redundancy is a legal
requirement for our business.
I'm sort of giving up on gluster though. It would seem a pretty stupid
content addressable storage would suit our needs better.
On 13 March 2018 at 10:12, Ondrej Valousek <Ondrej.Valousek at s3group.com>
wrote:
> Yes, I have had this in place already (well except of the negative
2018 Mar 13
3
Expected performance for WORM scenario
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Ondrej Valousek <
Ondrej.Valousek at s3group.com> wrote:
> Well, it might be close to the _*synchronous*_ nfs, but it is still well
> behind of the asynchronous nfs performance.
>
> Simple script (bit extreme I know, but helps to draw the picture):
>
>
>
> #!/bin/csh
>
>
>
> set HOSTNAME=`/bin/hostname`
>
> set j=1
2018 Mar 13
1
Expected performance for WORM scenario
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 2:42 PM, Ondrej Valousek <
Ondrej.Valousek at s3group.com> wrote:
> Yes, I have had this in place already (well except of the negative cache,
> but enabling that did not make much effect).
>
> To me, this is no surprise ? nothing can match nfs performance for small
> files for obvious reasons:
>
Could you give profile info of the run you did with
2018 Mar 13
0
Expected performance for WORM scenario
Yes, I have had this in place already (well except of the negative cache, but enabling that did not make much effect).
To me, this is no surprise ? nothing can match nfs performance for small files for obvious reasons:
1. Single server, does not have to deal with distributed locks
2. Afaik, gluster does not support read/write delegations the same way NFS does.
3. Glusterfs is
2005 Aug 10
6
USB handset wanted
Hello all asterisk users!
Question: Does anybody know about any good USB handset that would
understand SIP and Asterisk and will run with Linux?
I have found tons of them, but they are mainly only supported in Windows
environment.
I would like to set up new phone system in our company that would be
based on asterisk acting as PBX and SIP.
If you have any suggestions, please let me know. Any
2018 Mar 13
5
Expected performance for WORM scenario
On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 6:23 PM, Ondrej Valousek <
Ondrej.Valousek at s3group.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Gluster will never perform well for small files.
>
> I believe there is nothing you can do with this.
>
It is bad compared to a disk filesystem but I believe it is much closer to
NFS now.
Andreas,
Looking at your workload, I am suspecting there to be lot of LOOKUPs
2018 Mar 13
0
Expected performance for WORM scenario
Well, it might be close to the _synchronous_ nfs, but it is still well behind of the asynchronous nfs performance.
Simple script (bit extreme I know, but helps to draw the picture):
#!/bin/csh
set HOSTNAME=`/bin/hostname`
set j=1
while ($j <= 7000)
echo ahoj > test.$HOSTNAME.$j
@ j++
end
rm -rf test.$HOSTNAME.*
Takes 9 seconds to execute on the NFS share, but 90 seconds on
2010 Apr 01
3
RPID on called party
Hello,
Did anyone manage to force asterisk to put Remote-party-ID attribute on
the SIP outgoing call? I.e. When A calls B, I want that A gets a name of
B displayed on his phone.
Note that name of A gets displayed on the B's phone fine, but this is
not what I want.
This works with Cisco Call manager fine - the RPID is sent as a part of
the response to the SIP INVITE this way:
SIP/2.0 180
2018 Mar 14
0
Expected performance for WORM scenario
That seems unlikely. I pre-create the directory layout and then write to
directories I know exist.
I don't quite understand how any settings at all can reduce performance to
1/5000 of what I get when writing straight to ramdisk though, and
especially when running on a single node instead of in a cluster. Has
anyone else set this up and managed to get better write performance?
On 13 March
2018 Mar 07
1
gluster for home directories?
Hi,
On 2018-03-07 16:35, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
> Why do you need to replace your existing solution?
> If you don't need to scale out due to the capacity reasons, the async
> NFS server will always outperform GlusterFS
The current solution is 8 years old and is reaching its end of life.
The reason we are also looking into gluster is that we like that it uses
standard components
2007 Sep 19
18
sip.conf best practices?
All - I've been wrestling with how to best structure the sip device
accounts on a new asterisk server I'm deploying. All of the sip
devices (currently only Linksys SPA941s) will reside on the same
subnet as the server, and I have already set up a decent automatic
provisioning system for the phones. When the rollout is complete,
there will be about 100 SIP devices authenticating and
2011 Feb 07
1
remote bridging
Hi List,
Quick question:
I am using asterisk 1.8.1 - how do I detect whether a native (remote) bridge is being used between 2 SIP peers?
It is not obvious to me from the console logs.
Thanks,
Ondrej
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20110207/cf55a5dd/attachment.htm>
2012 Jun 01
2
ssh & control groups
Hi List,
I am looking for an option for sshd to start user's shell (when logging in interactively to a remote host) in a control group via cgexec -
so for example:
/bin/cgexec -g <username> /bin/bash
This would be extremely handy on linux Terminal servers to control users access to the system resources (protect system from a malicious
user hogging the machine by running cpu/memory
2009 May 21
2
Jitter buffer question
Hi List,
I have a question regarding jitterbuffer in Asterisk 1.4.24. I see that
jitterbuffer is only effective on the receiving channels.
My asterisk has only SIP accounts + 2 SIP trunk accounts to our branch
office.
Questions:
1. To enable jitter buffer on SIP channels it seems I have to enable and
force it, right?
2. If I enable and force jitter buffer, Asterisk would always have to
stay
2018 Mar 12
0
Expected performance for WORM scenario
Hi,
Gluster will never perform well for small files.
I believe there is nothing you can do with this.
Ondrej
From: gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org [mailto:gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org] On Behalf Of Andreas Ericsson
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 1:47 PM
To: Gluster-users at gluster.org
Subject: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario
Heya fellas.
I've been
2018 Mar 12
4
Expected performance for WORM scenario
Heya fellas.
I've been struggling quite a lot to get glusterfs to perform even
halfdecently with a write-intensive workload. Testnumbers are from gluster
3.10.7.
We store a bunch of small files in a doubly-tiered sha1 hash fanout
directory structure. The directories themselves aren't overly full. Most of
the data we write to gluster is "write once, read probably never", so 99%
2018 Mar 07
0
gluster for home directories?
Hi,
Why do you need to replace your existing solution?
If you don't need to scale out due to the capacity reasons, the async NFS server will always outperform GlusterFS
Ondrej
-----
The information contained in this e-mail and in any attachments is confidential and is designated solely for the attention of the intended recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient, you must not use,
2018 Mar 19
2
Gluster very poor performance when copying small files (1x (2+1) = 3, SSD)
Hi,
As I posted in my previous emails - glusterfs can never match NFS (especially async one) performance of small files/latency. That's given by the design.
Nothing you can do about it.
Ondrej
-----Original Message-----
From: gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org [mailto:gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org] On Behalf Of Rik Theys
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2018 10:38 AM
To: gluster-users at
2018 Mar 19
0
Gluster very poor performance when copying small files (1x (2+1) = 3, SSD)
On 3/19/2018 5:42 AM, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
Removing NFS or NFS Ganesha from the equation, not very impressed on my
own setup either. For the writes it's doing, that's alot of CPU usage
in top. Seems bottle-necked via a single execution core somewhere trying
to facilitate read / writes to the other bricks.
Writes to the gluster FS from within one of the gluster participating
bricks: