[asterisk-users] Breaking news, but what happened? 11.000 channels on one server

[Steve Totaro]

On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Benny Amorsen
<benny+usenet at amorsen.dk<benny%2Busenet at amorsen.dk>
> wrote:

> "Olle E. Johansson" <oej at edvina.net> writes:
>
> > Imaging my surprise this Monday when I installed a plain old Asterisk
> > 1.4 on a new HP server, a DL380 G6, and could run in circles around
> > the old IBM servers.
>
> The G6 series is pure magic for everything I've let it touch
> network-wise.
>
> I have three guesses as to why:
>
> 1) Lots and lots of bandwidth between CPU and I/O, plus built-in memory
> controller so any packet copying runs wicked fast.
>
> 2) MSI-X seems to really help, at least when combined with modern
> ethernet chipsets (the original PRO/1000 is looking a bit dated now, but
> more modern PRO/1000 should still be a good choice).
>
> 3) Multi-queue NIC. This should REALLY help when you have lots of cores
> and CPU threads. Depends on fairly new kernels.
>
> I'm not sure which is the answer though.
>
>
> /Benny
>
>
Packets per second is going to be the eventual bottleneck no matter if it is
Asterisk, FreeSwitch, or whatever.  Using multiple switches will help but a
backplane or interface. can only take so many PPS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Throughput
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20090907/4b72c2c3/attachment.htm