100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Durmuş Ali Öztürk
Hello,

we have a FreeSWITCH instance running on a IBM XSeries 32 bit server machine with a Windows 2003 operating system (RAM 6 GB). Our business logic is written in C# and integrated as a DLL module. Our module is originating the call via Native.Api DLL.
With this solution we could make up to 30 parallel calls without any problems (calling a number, playing a wav file, hang up).

If we increase the parallel call count to 100, we have problems with the sound (choppy) and the originate command returns with NO_ANSWER in many cases, but the callee has successfully answered (we have got many feedbacks, why we are calling but not speaking).

In some documents and maillist postings we readed out, that freeswitch can handle more than 1000 sessions. Are this numbers only for linux machines?

What are the limits of parallel calls with a Windows server and how we could increase the performance?

Which environment is recommend for use FreeSWITCH with bulk calls?

Does the .NET environment is blocking freeswitch while working?

Best regards
Ali






_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Phillip Jones-2
How quickly are you creating those one hundred calls?
 
Pj

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Durmuş Ali Öztürk <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello,

we have a FreeSWITCH instance running on a IBM XSeries 32 bit server machine with a Windows 2003 operating system (RAM 6 GB). Our business logic is written in C# and integrated as a DLL module. Our module is originating the call via Native.Api DLL.
With this solution we could make up to 30 parallel calls without any problems (calling a number, playing a wav file, hang up).

If we increase the parallel call count to 100, we have problems with the sound (choppy) and the originate command returns with NO_ANSWER in many cases, but the callee has successfully answered (we have got many feedbacks, why we are calling but not speaking).

In some documents and maillist postings we readed out, that freeswitch can handle more than 1000 sessions. Are this numbers only for linux machines?

What are the limits of parallel calls with a Windows server and how we could increase the performance?

Which environment is recommend for use FreeSWITCH with bulk calls?

Does the .NET environment is blocking freeswitch while working?

Best regards
Ali






_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org



_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Jeff Lenk
In reply to this post by Durmuş Ali Öztürk
you may want to have a look at http://jira.freeswitch.org/browse/FSCORE-626
This has a compiler flag to improve timing on Windows 2003 and other older OS.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Durmuş Ali Öztürk
In reply to this post by Phillip Jones-2
The phone numbers are hold in a array, in a forEach loop the calls are submitted. Before calling, there is a wait time of 1 second. Also the calls are created very quickly.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Durmuş Ali Öztürk
In reply to this post by Jeff Lenk
The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source code?

In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel 30 number?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Phillip Jones-2
>> The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code

That would seem like a reasonable thing to do.....

>> In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
 
In my (limited) experience there are two important things to control:

1) call per second
2) Total number of active sessions

Calls per seconds appears (to me) to have a greater effect on the CPU. So at 1 call per second I would be looking at your CPU utilization and if it is maxing out then reducing that rate.

My point being here that your box *may* be capable of handling 100 or 1000 sessions, if the cps is lowered.

HTH

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Durmuş Ali Öztürk <[hidden email]> wrote:

The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code?

In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
--
View this message in context: http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5340996.html
Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org


_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Durmuş Ali Öztürk
I will try to set up a fs system on CentOS, maybe the performance will be better.

I am sorry but I dont understand the difference between cps and number of active session.

If fs has 10 active sessions (with media), then the call per second should be 10 too??

2010/7/28 Phillip Jones-2 [via freeswitch-users] <[hidden email]>
>> The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code

That would seem like a reasonable thing to do.....

>> In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
 
In my (limited) experience there are two important things to control:

1) call per second
2) Total number of active sessions

Calls per seconds appears (to me) to have a greater effect on the CPU. So at 1 call per second I would be looking at your CPU utilization and if it is maxing out then reducing that rate.

My point being here that your box *may* be capable of handling 100 or 1000 sessions, if the cps is lowered.

HTH

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Durmuş Ali Öztürk <[hidden email]> wrote:

The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code?

In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
--
View this message in context: http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5340996.html
Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email] UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org


_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org



View message @ http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5344088.html
To unsubscribe from Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems), click here.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

jay binks

> I am sorry but I dont understand the difference between cps and number of active session.

CPA = call setups per second.
How many NEW calls hit your Freeswitch box every second.

Jay
_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Nyamul Hassan
In reply to this post by Durmuş Ali Öztürk
CPS stands for Calls Per Second.  Which basically means, the number of "new call attempts" that are hitting "every second".

Suppose you have 1 call attempt coming in every second.  After 30 seconds, out of the 30 attempts in total, only 10 were successfully connected.  That would still make your CPS = 1.  So, having 10 "active sessions" is not important.

The CPU has the most work to do during call setup, as it has to process the logic of establishing the call.  However, once the call is connected, there is very little "logical processing" for the CPU.

Regards
HASSAN



On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:54, Durmuş Ali Öztürk <[hidden email]> wrote:
I will try to set up a fs system on CentOS, maybe the performance will be better.

I am sorry but I dont understand the difference between cps and number of active session.

If fs has 10 active sessions (with media), then the call per second should be 10 too??

2010/7/28 Phillip Jones-2 [via freeswitch-users] <[hidden email]>
>> The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code

That would seem like a reasonable thing to do.....

>> In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
 
In my (limited) experience there are two important things to control:

1) call per second
2) Total number of active sessions

Calls per seconds appears (to me) to have a greater effect on the CPU. So at 1 call per second I would be looking at your CPU utilization and if it is maxing out then reducing that rate.

My point being here that your box *may* be capable of handling 100 or 1000 sessions, if the cps is lowered.

HTH

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Durmuş Ali Öztürk <[hidden email]> wrote:

The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code?

In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
--
View this message in context: http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5340996.html
Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]


_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]

View message @ http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5344088.html
To unsubscribe from Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems), click here.




View this message in context: Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org



_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

dnspyder
In reply to this post by Durmuş Ali Öztürk
Hi,

have you checked your switch.conf.xml configuration for "sessions-per-second" value?

<param name="sessions-per-second" value="30"/>

Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Daniel Neubert

On 28.07.2010 08:54, Durmuş Ali Öztürk wrote:
I will try to set up a fs system on CentOS, maybe the performance will be better.

I am sorry but I dont understand the difference between cps and number of active session.

If fs has 10 active sessions (with media), then the call per second should be 10 too??

2010/7/28 Phillip Jones-2 [via freeswitch-users] <[hidden email]>
>> The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code

That would seem like a reasonable thing to do.....

>> In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
 
In my (limited) experience there are two important things to control:

1) call per second
2) Total number of active sessions

Calls per seconds appears (to me) to have a greater effect on the CPU. So at 1 call per second I would be looking at your CPU utilization and if it is maxing out then reducing that rate.

My point being here that your box *may* be capable of handling 100 or 1000 sessions, if the cps is lowered.

HTH

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Durmuş Ali Öztürk <[hidden email]> wrote:

The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code?

In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
--
View this message in context: http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5340996.html
Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email] UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org


_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org



View message @ http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5344088.html
To unsubscribe from Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems), click here.




View this message in context: Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)
Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Durmuş Ali Öztürk
Hallo Daniel,

Yes, I have increased the value to 100.

What are your limits and which system/platform do you use?

MfG
Ali

2010/7/28 Daniel Neubert <[hidden email]>
Hi,

have you checked your switch.conf.xml configuration for "sessions-per-second" value?

<param name="sessions-per-second" value="30"/>

Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Daniel Neubert

On 28.07.2010 08:54, Durmuş Ali Öztürk wrote:
I will try to set up a fs system on CentOS, maybe the performance will be better.

I am sorry but I dont understand the difference between cps and number of active session.

If fs has 10 active sessions (with media), then the call per second should be 10 too??

2010/7/28 Phillip Jones-2 [via freeswitch-users] <[hidden email]>

>> The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code

That would seem like a reasonable thing to do.....

>> In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
 
In my (limited) experience there are two important things to control:

1) call per second
2) Total number of active sessions

Calls per seconds appears (to me) to have a greater effect on the CPU. So at 1 call per second I would be looking at your CPU utilization and if it is maxing out then reducing that rate.

My point being here that your box *may* be capable of handling 100 or 1000 sessions, if the cps is lowered.

HTH

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Durmuş Ali Öztürk <[hidden email]> wrote:

The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code?

In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
--
View this message in context: http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5340996.html
Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email] UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org


_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org



View message @ http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5344088.html
To unsubscribe from Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems), click here.




View this message in context: Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

dnspyder
We've not load-tested / stress-tested our platform setup, yet - but we will do this in a few weeks.
Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Daniel

On 28.07.2010 11:35, Durmuş Ali Öztürk wrote:
Hallo Daniel,

Yes, I have increased the value to 100.

What are your limits and which system/platform do you use?

MfG
Ali

2010/7/28 Daniel Neubert <[hidden email]>
Hi,

have you checked your switch.conf.xml configuration for "sessions-per-second" value?

<param name="sessions-per-second" value="30"/>

Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Daniel Neubert

    
On 28.07.2010 08:54, Durmuş Ali Öztürk wrote:
I will try to set up a fs system on CentOS, maybe the performance will be better.

I am sorry but I dont understand the difference between cps and number of active session.

If fs has 10 active sessions (with media), then the call per second should be 10 too??

2010/7/28 Phillip Jones-2 [via freeswitch-users] <[hidden email]>

>> The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code

That would seem like a reasonable thing to do.....

>> In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
 
In my (limited) experience there are two important things to control:

1) call per second
2) Total number of active sessions

Calls per seconds appears (to me) to have a greater effect on the CPU. So at 1 call per second I would be looking at your CPU utilization and if it is maxing out then reducing that rate.

My point being here that your box *may* be capable of handling 100 or 1000 sessions, if the cps is lowered.

HTH

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Durmuş Ali Öztürk <[hidden email]> wrote:

The compiler flag is not found in my solution, should I get the latest source
code?

In case of a timing problem, why it does not occured while calling parallel
30 number?
--
View this message in context: http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5340996.html
Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email] UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org


_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org



View message @ http://freeswitch-users.2379917.n2.nabble.com/100-parallel-calls-not-possible-Performance-problems-tp5339029p5344088.html
To unsubscribe from Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems), click here.




View this message in context: Re: 100 parallel calls not possible (Performance problems)

Sent from the freeswitch-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org