hi for 800 you can have a complete core 2 quad server you should have many servers and make an asterisk cluster instead of one super server. David
2009/3/27 Mike <[email protected]> > Thanks. I am "forced" to change servers anyways, so I'm starting from > scratch, which gives me the benefit of allowing me to plan things exactly as > I want them. > > > > I was hoping to avoid the TC400B until the server itself was almost under > strain, at which point I`d put one (or two) of those in to relieve it. But > what I really wanted to know if whether I'd go with a single quad-core or > two. Two isn't that much more expensive (not if it makes Asterisk process > twice as much stuff) but if it doesn't add anything, I'd rather avoid this > extra ~800$ per server. > > > > As for my specific needs: I am adding users/transcoded channels to this > server regularly, so I do see it being not powerful enough eventually. > That's why I am planning without giving any hard values: the most powerful > (for the buck) the better it is. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *D Tucny > *Sent:* Friday, March 27, 2009 0:42 > > *To:* Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion > *Subject:* Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk multi-cpu > > > > From your figures, it would appear that if you double the load you will be > potentially starting to see problems... > > FYI, not sure if it's of use to you... but... The digium tc400b is a > transcoder card that can offload upto 120 channels of transcoding for g729 > <-> ulaw... It's available as PCI only, but, if that's OK, it could be an > alternative to replacing your server... G729 licenses are not needed when > using that card... > > There have been posts by some people about having multiple CPU machines but > finding that asterisk's load wasn't spread over those CPUs very well... I'm > not sure if they had something special happening that caused their symptoms, > but, from your dual core machine you should be able to see whether or not > the load is already being spread across the 2 cores OK with your workload... > > d > > 2009/3/27 Mike <[email protected]> > > Thanks that`s great info, and I've already subscribed to the HA mailing > list. > > I understand call handling takes little CPU, but half my calls are > transcoded from ulaw to g729 and vice versa. That seems to take my single > CPU, dual-core 2.5Ghz machine up to ~35% CPU utilization. I imagine > doubling what happens on my server would take me dangerously close to the > upper limit of good call quality. > > Am I complete off? > > Mike > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:asterisk-users- > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of David Backeberg > > Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 18:40 > > To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion > > Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk multi-cpu > > > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Mike <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I know somebody is going to give me the link to the wiki hardware > pages, > > but > > > I can't find the answer there. I'd like to know if, for an Asterisk > only > > > system (nothing else of note running on it), I get a real gain from > > having 2 > > > CPUs. > > > > > > Does the amount of traffic/SIP registrations/codec translation possible > > > doubles with 2 CPUs? (each quad core E5420 to be precise)? Does it > > increase > > > by 50%? It is only a marginal increase, or none at all? > > > > You don't say anything about your possible kind of usage, so it's > > difficult to provide any specific answer to your question. In general, > > a few things are true: > > * asterisk is multi-threaded > > * linux kernel has nice job schedulers and i/o schedulers > > * if you have more ram, more things will get cached in ram > > * if you have more cpus / cores you can do more things at once as long > > as they aren't all idle waiting for some resource constraint > > > > You need to run a LOT of traffic through a server if it's just > > straight call handling, with a minimum of disk-bound i/o or > > transcoding, before you're going to max out modern hardware. So just > > buy the best server you want to buy, but save some money for a good > > warranty, or buy two servers if that's cheaper than what it would cost > > to be down. > > > > If you want more in-depth discussions on this you probably would > > prefer the asterisk-ha-clustering list: > > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-ha-clustering > > > > _______________________________________________ > > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > > > > asterisk-users mailing list > > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > > > _______________________________________________ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > -- (\__/) (='.'=)This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your (")_(")signature to help him gain world domination.
_______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
