Thanks for that Tzafrir. Why does it ignore the secend CPU?
BTW, on a side note on this topic, how can one calculate simultaneous transcoded channels using show transalation? In the case where it tells me 17 ms for encoding and 4 for decoding, that gives me 21ms per channel, in what time frame can I squeeze in how many channels before the calls start becoming intolerable? In other words should I aim for a 200ms time frame which means that I will get around 10 channels? or can I aim for a full second? which will give me around 50 channels? Thank You On 7/9/06, Tzafrir Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 05:07:16AM -0400, C F wrote: > Tzafrir, are you trying to tell me that I can realy do double on the > intel becuase the second CPU will do it? In the ideal case you'll get double performance with two CPUs. In theory. A case of many concurrent calls is basically something that can be easily parallelized. So in theory nothing stops you from getting something closer to double performance. I don't know how close reality is to that nice theory. I only remarked that 'show translations' totally ignores the second CPU. -- Tzafrir Cohen sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] icq#16849755 iax:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +972-50-7952406 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.xorcom.com _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
_______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
