[asterisk-users] Why "should not run FastAGI on the same server" ?

[Steve Totaro]

I agree about the business logic and take it a step further to redundancy.

You can have two separate machines hosting your AGIs.  It used to take
a patch and priority jumping enabled (N+101) to take advantage of this
ability, I am not sure if it was ever fixed.

I take the philosophy of letting your Asterisk box simply
handle/switch calls, while other machines provide services and
redundancy to that phone switch.

Thanks,
Steve Totaro

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Benjamin Jacob <ben4asterisk at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> The entire idea of using FastAGI is to relieve the Asterisk server of handling all the processing done by the AGI processes spawned by AGI/DeadAGI on the current server. With FastAGI, the business logic processing is supposed to be done on another server, thereby reducing load on the current one.
>
> - Ben.
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 5/27/08, Olivier <oza-4h07 at myamail.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Olivier <oza-4h07 at myamail.com>
>> Subject: [asterisk-users] Why "should not run FastAGI on the same server" ?
>> To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion" <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com>
>> Date: Tuesday, May 27, 2008, 9:28 AM
>> Hello,
>>
>> Here
>> (http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/index.php?page=Asterisk+FastAGI),
>> you
>> can see :
>> "You will even see some improvement when converting
>> your existing AGIs into
>> FastAGIs and running them on the same server as your phone
>> system, though
>> this is not always feasible or recommended."
>>
>> Why "this is not always feasible or recommended"
>> ?
>> Shall I understand "it's worth to try but if the
>> burden is too heavy for a
>> single machine, be prepared to use two machines" ?
>>