Hi , Thanks for the reply. Assuming that each proxy consumes 5% of CPU utilization for call processing, what will be the overall CPU utilization in first and second setup.
Thanks, Suresh -----Original Message----- From: Robert Story [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 2:19 AM To: Patil, Suresh (Suresh) Cc: '[email protected]' Subject: Re: Query regarding the net-snmp performance On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 16:19:48 +0530 Suresh (Suresh) wrote: PS> The second setup is as follows. PS> Here the proxy just acts as v2 to v3 converter and viceversa. PS> PS> Manager--------------- PS> | | | PS> | | | PS> Proxy Proxy Proxy PS> | | | PS> | | | PS> | | | PS> Host1 Host2 Host3 PS> PS> I would like to know which setup will have minimum cpu utilization and call PS> processing impact, considering that in future that Both should work, but the first (shared proxy) would require the manager to specify a non-default context to talk to the hosts. The second setup will consume more resources (since there are 3 proxies running), but wouldn't require contexts. -- NOTE: messages sent directly to me, instead of the lists, will be deleted unless they are requests for paid consulting services. Robert Story; NET-SNMP Junkie Support: <http://www.net-snmp.org/> <irc://irc.freenode.net/#net-snmp> Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=net-snmp-users> You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different. ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-users mailing list [email protected] Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-users
