I am also confused by this. When I initially discussed purchasing Digium's Business Edition of Asterisk, they (being Digium) recommended a dual proc machine. So I purchased that, and also made sure that RedHat Enterprise 3 (ES) supported the dual proc setup.
I merely assumed that this setup would be the best for Asterisk and that Asterisk could take advantage of it. I never did any research on the subject. So, should I just be purchasing one proc machines to run Asterisk at this time? I'd really like to get this cleared up, as I have to purchase another couple of servers for other offices we are going to be setting up. If the second proc is a waste today, it would certainly save some $. Mike -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 7:20 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [on-asterisk] Brainstorming dual-core and Asterisk So running [EMAIL PROTECTED] on a dual processor P2 333 system is still a waste of processing power? CentOS does recognize both processors and loads the SMP kernel. Is there any benefit at all? Peter M. > Maybe crazy enough that it will actually work. It amazes me sometimes > what ideas u come up with!! Some related news: > > 1) IAX is multithreaded in head now, so should work better on dual > processors than SIP, unless you're using the "other" asterisk sip > stack. Also, a side benefit, silence suppression on IAX will probably > come soon. > > On 3/2/06, Jim Van Meggelen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Let me run something that's been floating about in my noggin by everyone: > > > > Given that Asterisk does not make use of dual core CPUs or dual > > processors, I was contemplating whether running Asterisk in two (or > > more) VMWare sessions on a system might actually allow for more > > total performance. For example, set up one VM to handle incoming > > lines, echo cancellation and all sets, and then set up the other VM to handle VoIP, including transcoding. > > > > A bit kludgy, to be sure, but would VMWare allow for both cores/CPUs > > to be more fully utilized? > > > > Very possibly not practical, but it's been floating about my head > > for a bit and I figured I'd send it out into the ether to see what > > thoughts might come back. > > > > So . . . thoughts? > > > > Jim. > > > > -- > > Jim Van Meggelen > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/2177 > >
