[asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Rob Hillis]

I wasn't intending to blame Ira for his own problems - I was intending
to point out that running a production system on discarded hardware is a
really bad idea.

I wasn't even suggesting a mammoth server - as you may or may not have
seen in my subsequent reply to him, the place I work for sells fairly
low-end servers as Asterisk boxes which (at least in Australia) are
comparable to mid to upper-mid range desktops in terms of pricing.  90%
of the serious reliability problems I've seen are on hardware that
people have taken the really cheap route on.

Most people seem to think that Asterisk is a really cheap PBX.  While
Asterisk is certainly /cheaper/ than just about all comparable PBXs, if
it's to be done properly and reliably it's certainly not dirt cheap. 
Evaluating Asterisk certainly can be since if it's only a test system,
you can scrounge up some older hardware.  The real mistake is in putting
the older hardware into full production.


Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 06:21:15PM +1100, Rob Hillis wrote:
>   
>> I would suspect that your hardware is the cause of your problems. 
>> Running a production PBX system on a discarded desktop system is a
>> /really/ bad idea.
>>
>> I would seriously consider an upgrade to your hardware.
>>     
>
> Well, there is not enough data to suggest that. Before blaming Ira for
> being such a cheap fellow (after all, he didn't buy one of those IBM big
> iorns to run Asterisk on) we should also consider that the upgrade to
> 1.4 probably also involved an upgrade of Zaptel, which *is* kernel
> space.
>
> And maybe there was soemthing completely different. Which is why I asked
> for a trace, to give some sort of direction to see where the problem
> comes from.
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20080120/87797023/attachment.htm