For those of us that aren't (and will probably never be) linux performance experts, would it be possible for those with at least some knowledge to post some basic how-to's that have proven to helpful in the * environment?
If it makes sense to others, I'd volunteer to accept on-list or off-list emails, consolidate them, and enter them in the wiki (or even post them on another site if needed) for the benefit of all. Sure seems to be a need for this. Direct email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you'd like. Rich ------------------------ > > I have 4 gig in my * box. I'm tuning for performance and I'd like to ask > > opinions: > > > > 1. asterisk -p == renice -20 ?? > > The -p option sets asterisk to realtime priority if possible. This is > different from the traditional unix nice levels. A program with realtime > priorities will _never_ be preempted by a normal program. A program with > the traditional unix nicelevel of -20 will give up some time slots to > lower priority programs. > > This has advantages (scheduling of packets are much better e.g.) and > disadvantages (a broken asterisk server will leave the system impossible > to log in to). The disadvantage can be soften by keeping a shell open with > realtime priority (higher) around. > > Running with -p does help a lot for VoIP stuff. > > Note that this is user-space (pseudo) realtime stuff. Lowlatency patches > for the kernel can give better response time for the zaptel drivers as > well. This is orthogonal. > > > 2. I've turned off swap with no apparent ill effects. Can anyone commment on > > long term effects with moderate load (say, 30 SIP phones / 2-3K calls /day) > > Turning off swap means that the only page-freeing operation left is demand > paging of binaries. I.e. program text pages (the actual program that is) > are discarded and reloaded. This can be a rather bad idea. > > Asterisk should stay resident in memory under normal circumstances. There > can be a problem if you are running an ide disk and have unmasq irq turned > off. In that case disk accesses will definitly hurt you. For any hardware > from this side of the millenium unmasq irq should be safe. > > > 3. Can anyone comment on using ramdisk as swap and whether this is a good > > idea or bad idea? > > That is a bad idea. Use the ram as ram instead. > > > I'm using 2.6 kernel. I've modified the PCI latency in rc.local: > > > > setpci -v -s <my T100P address> latency_timer=ff > > Are you sure that is a good idea? That only makes the T100 hold the bus > longer. If my memory serves me the T100P is not bus mastering. I don't > think the pci latency value for it is relevant, but I am not sure. I do > believe the latency values of the other devices is at least as important. > The T100P does not need to transfer many bytes at a time, but it does need > to transfer them as soon as possible when they are ready. > > Peter > > > _______________________________________________ > Asterisk-Users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ---------------End of Original Message----------------- _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
