[asterisk-users] Using asterisk as the recording server

[Steve Totaro]

In layman's terms, if you read the OP's post, they want a *recording server*.
With no mention of any other functionality.

Asterisk *COULD* be used as a recording server but that is really not the
proper tool, on the other hand OrecX *IS* a recording server, therefore the
proper tool.

I *COULD* use a butter knife for a screw driver, but the screw driver
*IS*the proper tool for the job.

Believe me, I have used the butter knife and it worked OK sometimes, other
times it did not work at all, but the proper screwdriver did the job
perfectly.

I would dare say that using Asterisk simply for recording is heavy handed.

Thanks,
Steve Totaro

On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Steve Totaro <
stotaro at first-notification.com> wrote:

> Did you push it past 300 on two year old hardware and software?  Core 2 Duo
> Dell Dimension desktop as proof of concept?
>
> Port mirroring is basic on almost any newer switch.  Login, enable port
> monitoring, write mem, done.
>
> With a GUI, it takes all of thirty seconds.  I don't see how this is "heavy
> handed"
>
> I build robust and redundant systems, separate server for DB, recording,
> gateways, in an all HA configuration.
>
> Again, how many calls were you able record using RAMdisk?  Anywhere 300?
>
> Bookmark my post, so when you reach your RAMDisk limit, you can join the
> big league.
>
> Thanks,
> Steve Totaro
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 12:05 AM, David Backeberg <dbackeberg at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Steve
>> Totaro<stotaro at asteriskhelpdesk.com> wrote:
>> > A dedicated recording server is recommended if you are going to be
>> recording
>> > a good deal of calls.
>> >
>> > You certainly would not want to run out of hard drive space on your
>> Asterisk
>> > server and bring it down.
>>
>> Bring it down, really?
>>
>> I think monitor would just complain that it couldn't write to a
>> device. I suppose you could have problems if your recording partition
>> was also your system partition, but that would be true for any
>> application, such as apache web activity logs.
>>
>> > Also, with Asterisk (last I knew) ~60 simultaneous calls, the audio
>> starts
>> > breaking up very badly due to I/O.
>>
>> This would be channel and system independent. For instance i/o
>> blocking could cause problems but why would it affect simple non-mixed
>> audio, like simple bridged Dahdi channels?
>>
>> > OrecX can do over 300 simultaneous calls and only need port mirroring
>> > enabled on your switch.  Even if it crashes or HD fills, call go on
>> > normally.
>>
>> If a non-system hd fills, calls will go on normally.
>> Port mirroring seems like a pretty heavy-handed way to do call recording.
>>
>> How about asterisk, writing to a ramdisk for recordings, and every
>> five minutes or so syncing off the completed recordings to a SAN? (You
>> may have guessed I did this, and pushed it past 60 simultaneous
>> recordings).
>>
>


-- 
Senior Systems and Network Administrator
Triple Canopy, Inc.,
2250 Corporate Park Drive, Suite 300
ph.   +1.703.673.5191
mob.+1.240.938.1212
FAX.+1.703.673.1279
steve.totaro at triplecanopy.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20090907/17e73f18/attachment.htm