[asterisk-users] RAMDisk vs Extarnal server for recording

[Robin]

Thanks for your response.
The hardware I have now is not sufficient to set up a ramdisk (just 4 gb)...
But memory is rather cheap nowadays. If i'd buf up the server with 8 extra
gigs for use as a ramdrive, do you think that might be enough to record
between 30-60 simultanious streams? Or should it be way more?

btw, I found this thread somewhere:
http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/2005-October/120930.html,
but this is rather old info. Is this documentation still usefull? And if
not, do you happen to have any idea/url/doc where I can find a bit less old
info?

thanks,

robin

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 13:21, Zoaaaaa <zoachien at securax.org> wrote:

>
>
> There are 2 issues i think, one is the seek time on harddisks and the
> lack of a big buffer in Asterisk (saving 10 streams at the same time
> will cause a loooot of random writes).
> The other one is the interrupts being taken up by the harddisk.
>
> So an SSD might help, saving to an network drive might help (it moves
> the issue to another server, where it might not cause a problem),
> buffering to ram (but you will lack space).
> The best solution depends on your exact hardware and the amount of
> writes you want to do.
>
> Buffering to a ramdrive before moving it over NFS seems like the best
> idea to me.
>
> Zoa
>
> Robin wrote:
> > I'm having loads of problems with recordings, as in crappy audio
> > quality and lost pieces of the recordings. I've been searching for a
> > solution and the solutions i find on the interwebs include a ramdisk,
> > for local recording, or another machine, handling the recording. I
> > guess the ramdisk would be the "easy" solution and the external
> > machine would be  little harder to set up. I do actually prefer the
> > external machine, but i'm not exaclty sure how to set that one up...
> > The reason I prefer the external machine, is that the recording have
> > to be moved to an external machine anyway. Although I've come across a
> > post somewhere, talking about recording to ramdisk and then move the
> > files over a crosscable directly to another disk over 1000mbit. Which
> > sound nice as well...
> >
> > What do you advise for bringing serverload down and get rid of the
> > harddisk bottleneck? Is a ramdisk a better solution then an external
> > machine? And if so, why?
> >
> > Sorry about this pro-con question, but I cannot find an answer which
> > compares these pro-cons anywhere.
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > robin
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
> >
> > asterisk-users mailing list
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> >    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>
> asterisk-users mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20091021/1fcbfedd/attachment.htm