this was posted before:
On 5/12/05, Colin Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > They instantly got us to look at the output of zttest and we found that
> this was (in their words) 'extremely low', with 'best' and  > 'worst'
> readings of 99.975586% and 99.963379% respectively.  
>  
> Might want to give PCI latency setting a try, it helped for me. My ZTTEST
> would drop occasionally to 99.95% until I set:
>  
> setpci -v -s 01:01.0 latency_timer=ff <--Digium PRI card
> setpci -v -s 01:04:0 latency_timer=ff <--Digium 401 4 X FXS
> setpci -v -s XX:XX:X latency_timer=0 <--1 entry for every other PCI card in
> system from LSPCI output, modify XX:XX accordingly
>  
> Before setpci I would get best in ZTTEST at 99.987793% and worst ~ 99.95%
>  
> After setpci best is 100% and worst is 99.987793% consitient. 
>  
> I use SpanDSP to recieve faxes and before faxes were garbled and now they
> are OK (BTW, now recieving ~150 faxes a day 99.95% OK, so SpanDSP *does*
> work fine, you just have to set it up right. Ask me how.)
>  
> I put the setpci statements in /etc/rc.d/rc.local before my modprobes to the
> Digium hardware and Asterisk startup. 
>  
> I'm using a 4-way Netfinity FC2 * 1.0 stable
>  
> I dunno, maybe the community is being too hard on Digium about the design of
> the card. I can understand their perpective, it's brutal to make a card that
> has to have such tight tolerances and make it work acceptably on the huge
> variation in white box hardware (or black box, in your case). There's a page
> on the Wiki about motherboards that work well with installation notes but
> that's pointless since motherboards are such a moving target. Even the
> motherboard vendor screwing around with BIOS updates can invalidate that
> information. 


Waldo Rubinstein escribió:
I was browsing the applications developed in zaptel and came across  zttest.

After I run it, I get the following:

Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy...
99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.000000%  99.987793%
99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793%  99.987793% 99.975586%
99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793%  99.987793% 99.987793%
99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793%  99.987793% 99.987793%
99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793%  99.987793% 99.987793%
99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793%  99.987793% 99.987793%
100.000000% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793%  99.987793% 99.987793%
99.987793% 99.987793%
--- Results after 57 passes ---
Best: 100.000000 -- Worst: 99.975586 -- Average: 99.987793

What does this mean? Should I have expected to get 100% across the  board?

This is from a TE410P running on Debian 2.6.11-1-686-smp on a dual  Xeon 2.4GHz server.

Thanks,
Waldo
_______________________________________________
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






_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to