[asterisk-users] need examples of asterisk and mysql integration

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 03:29:47PM -0400, Mike Trest - On Travel wrote:
> At 02:58 PM 4/23/2008, you wrote:
> Re performance hit.
> 
> 
> I actually re-wrote one of my frequently used AGI in "C" and even set 
> the STICKEY-BIT to avoid reloading the static text portions.

Doesn't Linux ignore the sticky bit?

> 
> I noticed slightly lower disk activity level (but the perl file was 
> probably in memory cache too).  So keeping it memory resident with 
> stickey-bit probably was not really needed.  But I did see a drop in 
> over-all memory usage.   Alas,  none of these  'savings' were big 
> enough to matter.

There's a difference between C and a dynamic language engine (such as
perl and PHP).

To give you some idea of that, let's look at some "do nothing" loops.

# For a base line: pure internal shell:

$ cnt_list=`seq 100`; time ( for i in $cnt_list; do :; done ) 

real    0m0.001s
user    0m0.000s
sys     0m0.000s

# What happens if I run a subshell?

$ cnt_list=`seq 100`; time ( for i in $cnt_list; do (:); done ) 

real    0m0.240s
user    0m0.036s
sys     0m0.204s


# Now a small C program:

$ cnt_list=`seq 100`; time ( for i in $cnt_list; do /bin/true; done ) 

real    0m0.272s
user    0m0.052s
sys     0m0.216s

Slightly worse.

Now a very minimal perl script:

$ cnt_list=`seq 100`; time ( for i in $cnt_list; do perl -e ''; done ) 

real    0m0.570s
user    0m0.220s
sys     0m0.352s

# Not so bad, right? But it didn't actually have to compile anything.
# Let's give it something to compile:

$ cnt_list=`seq 100`; time ( for i in $cnt_list; do perl -MCGI -e ''; done
) 

real    0m4.447s
user    0m2.884s
sys     0m1.564s

# Likewise PHP5

$ cnt_list=`seq 100`; time ( for i in $cnt_list; do php5 -r ''; done ) 

real    0m3.241s
user    0m1.524s
sys     0m1.716s


# Python:

$ cnt_list=`seq 100`; time ( for i in $cnt_list; do python -c ''; done ) 

real    0m2.618s
user    0m1.684s
sys     0m0.932s

As you can see, each of them used way more than one second of pure CPU
time for 100 runs (except the C one, and the perl-without-modules one).
And this is with very optimal caching and such.

My system is not top of the line:

processor       : 0
vendor_id       : AuthenticAMD
cpu family      : 15
model           : 44
model name      : AMD Sempron(tm) Processor 2600+
stepping        : 2
cpu MHz         : 1599.856
cache size      : 128 KB
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 1
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge
mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt
lm 3dnowext 3dnow up pni lahf_lm
bogomips        : 3203.56
TLB size        : 1024 4K pages
clflush size    : 64
cache_alignment : 64
address sizes   : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management: ts ttp tm stc

Kernel: Linux frenkel 2.6.22-3-amd64 #1 SMP Tue Feb 12 09:22:35 UTC 2008
x86_64 GNU/Linux

-- 
               Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755              jabber:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
+972-50-7952406           mailto:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
http://www.xorcom.com  iax:guest at local.xorcom.com/tzafrir