[Asterisk-Dev] spike / asterisk hang? <- On a 360MHz CPU - no, 440 :)

[Rich Adamson]

> >>>Perhaps there are some performance optimizations that could improve
> >>>matters somewhat, but I suspect that the least expensive, most painless
> >>>way to resolve it is to replace the system with something more powerful.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>'least expensive' is to buy something more powerful? *boggle*
> >>;)
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Cost of a 3000+ AMD PC with 512mb ram is under $400. Intel shouldn't be
> >much different.
> >
> >At $100 an hour for most programmers to take on the task, you would get
> >out cheaper on the new hardware.
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> Ok, not being a jerk here or anything.. but if *anyone* has links to 
> solid and cheap rackmount systems with some sort of LOM and console 
> capability such as my netras have I would owe them a beer or 6.
> 
> Moving on..
> 
> Please don't take this the wrong way but isn't that sort of microsoft 
> mentality? Just make the huddled masses upgrade.. it's easier or cheaper 
> then throwing programmers at code correction. Again.. I'm just saying.. 
> no offense intended.
> 
> I do get the point that the asterisk community is not interested in 
> making my old 8086 act as a national call center.. but you have to admit 
> there is definite value to my theory that some things should take 
> priority over others.. ie: dsp vs. call signaling.

I worked with a guy in Canada some time ago that was running asterisk
on a 300 mhz box. It worked just fine, and actually had less echo then
a 2 ghz box with an x100p (most likely because of pci bus issues).

The point to be made is this... no calls in progress, no cpu consumed.
One call in progress, cpu is utilized but not taxed. The more 
simultanous calls, the higher the cpu utilization until strange
failures occur.  Sip phones and asterisk on the same wire with
canreinvite=yes, a hundred phones (but not all calling at the same
time. ;)

Rich