[asterisk-users] zttest output
Hey guys, I'm running asterisk inside of a Xen VM and have a quick question. Usually when I run zttest against a generic FXO card (one of those ebay units with the Motorola chipset) inside the VM, I get between 99.91 and 99.98. I don't have access to another card to run in an actual machine instead of a VM, so I was just wondering what kind of results you guys get with zttest on these generic cards. zap show status calls this card a Wildcard X100P Board 1. Anyone else have access to one of these cheapy cards and a minute to run a quick zttest for me? -- Jason The place where you made your stand never mattered, only that you were there... and still on your feet ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest - 100% ?
do you think it would make any difference to change the process-priority if zttest is the only running process except ssh-daemon and the login-shells ? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 30.09.2005 18:11:47: Are you starting Asterisk with the -p option (high priority?) Also, do you get a different value if you run zttest this way: nice -n -20 zttest Carlos On 9/30/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Digium itself is saying their cards may work not properly with zttest results below 99,98 the card itself is working the way that we can call out and receive calls, but we encountered massive echo-problems - sometimes more, sometimes less even on lines within the same phone-provider and be sure that we've been messing around with all other possible parameters for weeks without any result. Until now we've got a setup that we can live with at least until we get different hardware. It's really worse calling someone and missing the name the called person said then picking up the phone in cause of echo-cancelling parameters or even think the line is dead, or if you've got massive echoes and it takes about 30 seconds to filter them out if at all. Dirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 30.09.2005 16:34:18: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just as an (bad) example: we are using an x206 and couldn't get the zttest above 99.975 equal what we were doing single irq, w/o acpi, w/o apic, different kernels, w/o hyperthreading, different slots, a.s.o. for an Digium wildcard TE110P so if someone got such a board to zttest 100% maybe could give some information if where's something special to run asterisk on such boards... otherwise I think there are production differences on the ibm-mainboards or the used chipsets we'll change hardware next... You don't have to have 100% on zttest. You probably won't get it. I get the same results on one of my servers and it runs perfectly. Kevin ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest - 100% ?
just as an (bad) example: we are using an x206 and couldn't get the zttest above 99.975 equal what we were doing single irq, w/o acpi, w/o apic, different kernels, w/o hyperthreading, different slots, a.s.o. for an Digium wildcard TE110P so if someone got such a board to zttest 100% maybe could give some information if where's something special to run asterisk on such boards... otherwise I think there are production differences on the ibm-mainboards or the used chipsets we'll change hardware next... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 29.09.2005 18:35:03: This might seem a silly question but, what is the true meaning of the numbers zttest spits out? On 9/29/05, Marco Supino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, My TDM is on its own IRQ, and the x306 has only one full-size PCI slot.. so no playing with it, what results do you get from zttest ? what IRQ is the card on ? Marco. Damian Funnell wrote: Have you checked that the TDM400P isn't sharing an IRQ with anything else? Don't trust /proc/interrupts - run lspci -v to confirm this. We have * running on an x206 and found that the only way to stop the TDP400P sharing an IRQ with other devices was to juggle cards between slots. Hope this helps! Damian. Marco Supino wrote: Hi, I would like to know what type of configuration could get me closer to 100% hits in zttest, when testing a TDM400P with 4 FXO ports, I am currently running kernel 2.4.31, on a IBM Xseries 306, with 3gh CPU, HT is disabled, PCI latency was changed, i still cant get more then 99.975% in the zttest testings, Thanks for any info. Marco. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest - 100% ?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just as an (bad) example: we are using an x206 and couldn't get the zttest above 99.975 equal what we were doing single irq, w/o acpi, w/o apic, different kernels, w/o hyperthreading, different slots, a.s.o. for an Digium wildcard TE110P so if someone got such a board to zttest 100% maybe could give some information if where's something special to run asterisk on such boards... otherwise I think there are production differences on the ibm-mainboards or the used chipsets we'll change hardware next... You don't have to have 100% on zttest. You probably won't get it. I get the same results on one of my servers and it runs perfectly. Kevin ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest - 100% ?
Digium itself is saying their cards may work not properly with zttest results below 99,98 the card itself is working the way that we can call out and receive calls, but we encountered massive echo-problems - sometimes more, sometimes less even on lines within the same phone-provider and be sure that we've been messing around with all other possible parameters for weeks without any result. Until now we've got a setup that we can live with at least until we get different hardware. It's really worse calling someone and missing the name the called person said then picking up the phone in cause of echo-cancelling parameters or even think the line is dead, or if you've got massive echoes and it takes about 30 seconds to filter them out if at all. Dirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 30.09.2005 16:34:18: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just as an (bad) example: we are using an x206 and couldn't get the zttest above 99.975 equal what we were doing single irq, w/o acpi, w/o apic, different kernels, w/o hyperthreading, different slots, a.s.o. for an Digium wildcard TE110P so if someone got such a board to zttest 100% maybe could give some information if where's something special to run asterisk on such boards... otherwise I think there are production differences on the ibm-mainboards or the used chipsets we'll change hardware next... You don't have to have 100% on zttest. You probably won't get it. I get the same results on one of my servers and it runs perfectly. Kevin ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest - 100% ?
Are you starting Asterisk with the -p option (high priority?) Also, do you get a different value if you run zttest this way: nice -n -20 zttest CarlosOn 9/30/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Digium itself is saying their cards may work not properly with zttestresults below 99,98 the card itself is workingthe way that we can call out and receivecalls, but we encountered massive echo-problems - sometimes more,sometimes less even on lines within the same phone-provider and be surethat we've been messing around with all other possible parameters for weeks without any result. Until now we've got a setup thatwe can live with at least until we get different hardware.It's really worse calling someone and missing the name the called personsaid then picking up the phone in cause of echo-cancelling parameters or even think the line is dead, or if you've got massive echoesand it takes about 30 seconds to filter them out if at all.Dirk[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 30.09.2005 16:34:18: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just as an (bad) example: we are using an x206 and couldn't get the zttest above 99.975 equal what we were doing single irq, w/o acpi, w/o apic, different kernels, w/o hyperthreading, different slots, a.s.o. for an Digium wildcard TE110P so if someone got such a board to zttest 100% maybe could give some information if where's something special to run asterisk on such boards... otherwise I think there are production differences on the ibm-mainboards or the used chipsets we'll change hardware next... You don't have to have 100% on zttest.You probably won't get it.I get the same results on one of my servers andit runs perfectly. Kevin ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com --Asterisk-Users mailing listAsterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-usersTo UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- We hold [...] that all men are created equal; that they areendowed [...] with certain inalienable rights; that amongthese are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness -- Thomas Jefferson ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Asterisk-Users] zttest - 100% ?
Hi, I would like to know what type of configuration could get me closer to 100% hits in zttest, when testing a TDM400P with 4 FXO ports, I am currently running kernel 2.4.31, on a IBM Xseries 306, with 3gh CPU, HT is disabled, PCI latency was changed, i still cant get more then 99.975% in the zttest testings, Thanks for any info. Marco. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest - 100% ?
Have you checked that the TDM400P isn't sharing an IRQ with anything else? Don't trust /proc/interrupts - run lspci -v to confirm this. We have * running on an x206 and found that the only way to stop the TDP400P sharing an IRQ with other devices was to juggle cards between slots. Hope this helps! Damian. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Marco Supino wrote: Hi, I would like to know what type of configuration could get me closer to 100% hits in zttest, when testing a TDM400P with 4 FXO ports, I am currently running kernel 2.4.31, on a IBM Xseries 306, with 3gh CPU, HT is disabled, PCI latency was changed, i still cant get more then 99.975% in the zttest testings, Thanks for any info. Marco. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest - 100% ?
Hi, My TDM is on its own IRQ, and the x306 has only one full-size PCI slot.. so no playing with it, what results do you get from zttest ? what IRQ is the card on ? Marco. Damian Funnell wrote: Have you checked that the TDM400P isn't sharing an IRQ with anything else? Don't trust /proc/interrupts - run lspci -v to confirm this. We have * running on an x206 and found that the only way to stop the TDP400P sharing an IRQ with other devices was to juggle cards between slots. Hope this helps! Damian. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Marco Supino wrote: Hi, I would like to know what type of configuration could get me closer to 100% hits in zttest, when testing a TDM400P with 4 FXO ports, I am currently running kernel 2.4.31, on a IBM Xseries 306, with 3gh CPU, HT is disabled, PCI latency was changed, i still cant get more then 99.975% in the zttest testings, Thanks for any info. Marco. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest - 100% ?
This might seem a silly question but, what is the true meaning of the numbers zttest spits out?On 9/29/05, Marco Supino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hi,My TDM is on its own IRQ, and the x306 has only one full-size PCI slot.. so no playing with it,what results do you get from zttest ? what IRQ is the card on ?Marco.Damian Funnell wrote: Have you checked that the TDM400P isn't sharing an IRQ with anything else?Don't trust /proc/interrupts - run lspci -v to confirm this. We have * running on an x206 and found that the only way to stop the TDP400P sharing an IRQ with other devices was to juggle cards between slots. Hope this helps! Damian. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Marco Supino wrote: Hi, I would like to know what type of configuration could get me closer to 100% hits in zttest, when testing a TDM400P with 4 FXO ports, I am currently running kernel 2.4.31, on a IBM Xseries 306, with 3gh CPU, HT is disabled, PCI latency was changed, i still cant get more then 99.975% in the zttest testings, Thanks for any info. Marco. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com --Asterisk-Users mailing listAsterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-usersTo UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- We hold [...] that all men are created equal; that they areendowed [...] with certain inalienable rights; that amongthese are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness -- Thomas Jefferson ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
Hi, I just migrated my colinux to kernel 2.6.10. And I get really weird results (voice is just highly distorted slow noise). Here is zttest... Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... -799.853516% -799.951172% -800.329590% -799.755859% -799.951172% -799.804688% -799.987793% --- Results after 7 passes --- Best: 0.00 -- Worst: -800.329590 ./ztspeed Count: 251671 I am running CVS-HEAD-05/17/05-16:23:07, with no TDM hardware at all Any idea of what could be wrong ? Yours, JeanHuguesRobert At 23:26 15/05/2005 -0400, you wrote: 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% 100.00% 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% 100.00% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% --- Results after 57 passes --- Best: 100.00 -- 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users - Web: http://hdl.handle.net/1030.37/1.1 Phone: +33 (0) 4 92 27 74 17 ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 08:59:23PM +1200, Damian Funnell wrote: Hi Waldo, I would be money on your problem being related to the accuracy of zttest. One way of checking IRQ's is to run cat /proc/interrupts, but it is a lot more accurate to run lspci -v and lspci -vb. I would recommend Googling the lspci command, although the output is pretty self explanatory. The TDM appears as a TigerJet card, not sure what TE410P will list as. PCI devices have their IRQ's dictated by the BIOS of the host system. How (and if) you can configure these manually depends on the type of BIOS you have... in our IBM xSeries 206 we had to actually juggle cards between slots to get it to assign a unique IRQ to the TDM400P. Good luck! Before changing IRQ in BIOS I had: 4: 23643 XT-PIC eth0, wctdm After changing IRQ in BIOS I had: b2:/usr/src/zaptel# cat /proc/interrupts CPU0 0: 51108 XT-PIC timer 1: 2 XT-PIC keyboard 2: 0 XT-PIC cascade 7: 23643 XT-PIC eth0, wctdm 14: 3073 XT-PIC ide0 15: 2 XT-PIC ide1 NMI: 0 LOC: 51070 ERR: 0 MIS: 0 Then I changed the TDM400P card to a different PCI slot and I get: b2:/usr/src/zaptel# cat /proc/interrupts CPU0 0: 6966 XT-PIC timer 1: 2 XT-PIC keyboard 2: 0 XT-PIC cascade 4:321 XT-PIC eth0 9: 6143 XT-PIC wctdm 14: 1099 XT-PIC ide0 15: 2 XT-PIC ide1 NMI: 0 LOC: 6929 ERR: 0 MIS: 0 But then I found other evidence of sharing (which I verified with lspci -vv): May 18 22:11:31 b2 kernel: Zapata Telephony Interface Registered on major 196 May 18 22:11:33 b2 kernel: PCI: Found IRQ 9 for device 01:07.0 May 18 22:11:33 b2 kernel: PCI: Sharing IRQ 9 with 00:02.0 May 18 22:11:33 b2 kernel: Freshmaker version: 71 May 18 22:11:33 b2 kernel: Freshmaker passed register test May 18 22:11:33 b2 kernel: Module 0: Installed -- AUTO FXO (FCC mode) May 18 22:11:33 b2 kernel: Module 1: Not installed May 18 22:11:33 b2 kernel: Module 2: Installed -- AUTO FXS/DPO May 18 22:11:33 b2 kernel: Module 3: Not installed May 18 22:11:33 b2 kernel: Found a Wildcard TDM: Wildcard TDM400P REV E/F (4 modules) May 18 22:11:33 b2 kernel: Registered tone zone 0 (United States / North America) The BIOS always showed that I was sharing an IRQ with something else regardless of the which of the four slots I tried. I ended up with the BIOS telling me I was sharing with the USB; I turned USB off in the BIOS along with everything else like serial and parallel ports.: b2:/usr/src/zaptel# cat /proc/interrupts CPU0 0: 24659 XT-PIC timer 1: 2 XT-PIC keyboard 2: 0 XT-PIC cascade 3: 205151 XT-PIC wctdm 4:569 XT-PIC eth0 14: 1134 XT-PIC ide0 15: 2 XT-PIC ide1 NMI: 0 LOC: 24621 ERR: 0 MIS: 0 May 18 23:28:34 b2 kernel: Zapata Telephony Interface Registered on major 196 May 18 23:28:36 b2 kernel: PCI: Found IRQ 3 for device 01:0a.0 May 18 23:28:36 b2 kernel: Freshmaker version: 71 May 18 23:28:36 b2 kernel: Freshmaker passed register test May 18 23:28:36 b2 kernel: Module 0: Installed -- AUTO FXO (FCC mode) May 18 23:28:36 b2 kernel: Module 1: Not installed May 18 23:28:36 b2 kernel: Module 2: Installed -- AUTO FXS/DPO May 18 23:28:36 b2 kernel: Module 3: Not installed May 18 23:28:36 b2 kernel: Found a Wildcard TDM: Wildcard TDM400P REV E/F (4 modules) May 18 23:28:36 b2 kernel: Registered tone zone 0 (United States / North America) ...and lspci -vv shows no sharing either. The test numbers are quite similar to those of the stronger machine described near the end of this post. The test numbers were the same for all the PCI slots and IRQ combinations I tried. b2:/usr/src/zaptel# ./zttest Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... 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% 100.00% 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% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.00% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% --- Results after 71 passes ---
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
After I run it, I get the following: 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.00% 99.987793% Just for reference, I'm running a PIII-800Mhz and I get (with no particular load on CPU) -Best: 100.00 -- Worst: 99.987793 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
Hi Waldo, I would be money on your problem being related to the accuracy of zttest. One way of checking IRQ's is to run cat /proc/interrupts, but it is a lot more accurate to run lspci -v and lspci -vb. I would recommend Googling the lspci command, although the output is pretty self explanatory. The TDM appears as a TigerJet card, not sure what TE410P will list as. PCI devices have their IRQ's dictated by the BIOS of the host system. How (and if) you can configure these manually depends on the type of BIOS you have... in our IBM xSeries 206 we had to actually juggle cards between slots to get it to assign a unique IRQ to the TDM400P. Good luck! D. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Waldo Rubinstein wrote: Damian, Thanks for your input. Hyperthreading is in fact enabled and now that you mention this I will disable it. The reason I ask is because under some load (may be 40 simultaneous calls), voice quality degrades. We have audio problems where one party hears the other but not viceversa and then it all works fine. It's random audio quality problems in general. During these cases, I'm constantly running vmstat 1 and CPU utilization is always 85%+ idle. I will also look into setting the TE410P in its own IRQ. Do you know how I can do that? Is that a motherboard BIOS setting or is it something that needs to be done to the TE410P itself? Thanks, Waldo On May 16, 2005, at 12:59 AM, Damian Funnell wrote: Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). Do you have issues with your * box? If so then I would start worrying about zttest output (and thinking about disabling hyper threading on those dual Xeons), otherwise have a smile and a beer and pity us poor fools who have had problems due to poor results. Cheers, Damian. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Waldo Rubinstein wrote: 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% 100.00% 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% 100.00% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% --- Results after 57 passes --- Best: 100.00 -- 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). How do you disable hyper threading (what's the command and where is it placed)? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
How do you disable hyper threading (what's the command and where is it placed)? Hyper-threading is a BIOS feature available on some Pentium 4 Xeon processors. If you have hyper-threading enabled your system may appear to have more processors than are physically in the system. Typically twice as many. You generally disable the hyperthreading feature through the BIOS setup program that's normally accessible when the system boots. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
On 06:37, Mon 16 May 05, Rich Adamson wrote: Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). How do you disable hyper threading (what's the command and where is it placed)? You have to disable it in your server's BIOS. You can also try to install an uniprocessor kernel, but I don't know if that is enough. We had to disable HT too to get it all working the way we want. I think this is an issue with the HT support in kernel 2.4.X -- Michiel van Baak http://lunteren.vanbaak.info [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x7E0B9A2D Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and BSD. I don't think that this is a coincidence. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
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 escribi: 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% 100.00% 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% 100.00% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% --- Results after 57 passes --- Best: 100.00 -- 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
On May 16, 2005, at 14:37, Rich Adamson wrote: Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). How do you disable hyper threading (what's the command and where is it placed)? If this is a Linux box, look at the kernel boot arguments in [lilo| grub].conf and append noht, that disables it. My grub.conf on one of my boxes looks like this: title CentOS (2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp) root (hd0,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp ro root=LABEL=/ noht initrd /initrd-2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp.img jens ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
That's a setting of the BIOS (at least on the motherboard we have). - Waldo On May 16, 2005, at 8:37 AM, Rich Adamson wrote: Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). How do you disable hyper threading (what's the command and where is it placed)? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
This is interesting. Do you also have a TE410P? - Waldo On May 16, 2005, at 2:46 AM, Wilson Pickett wrote: After I run it, I get the following: 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.00% 99.987793% Just for reference, I'm running a PIII-800Mhz and I get (with no particular load on CPU) -Best: 100.00 -- Worst: 99.987793 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
Thanks. That gives me something to work on. - Waldo On May 16, 2005, at 4:59 AM, Damian Funnell wrote: Hi Waldo, I would be money on your problem being related to the accuracy of zttest. One way of checking IRQ's is to run cat /proc/ interrupts, but it is a lot more accurate to run lspci -v and lspci -vb. I would recommend Googling the lspci command, although the output is pretty self explanatory. The TDM appears as a TigerJet card, not sure what TE410P will list as. PCI devices have their IRQ's dictated by the BIOS of the host system. How (and if) you can configure these manually depends on the type of BIOS you have... in our IBM xSeries 206 we had to actually juggle cards between slots to get it to assign a unique IRQ to the TDM400P. Good luck! D. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Waldo Rubinstein wrote: Damian, Thanks for your input. Hyperthreading is in fact enabled and now that you mention this I will disable it. The reason I ask is because under some load (may be 40 simultaneous calls), voice quality degrades. We have audio problems where one party hears the other but not viceversa and then it all works fine. It's random audio quality problems in general. During these cases, I'm constantly running vmstat 1 and CPU utilization is always 85%+ idle. I will also look into setting the TE410P in its own IRQ. Do you know how I can do that? Is that a motherboard BIOS setting or is it something that needs to be done to the TE410P itself? Thanks, Waldo On May 16, 2005, at 12:59 AM, Damian Funnell wrote: Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). Do you have issues with your * box? If so then I would start worrying about zttest output (and thinking about disabling hyper threading on those dual Xeons), otherwise have a smile and a beer and pity us poor fools who have had problems due to poor results. Cheers, Damian. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Waldo Rubinstein wrote: 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% 100.00% 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% 100.00% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% --- Results after 57 passes --- Best: 100.00 -- 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
Hi Rich, This is always a BIOS setting - there is no O/S command to disable H/T. To date I have never heard of a BIOS that does not allow the user to disable H/T, but I have read that there are BIOS'es out there that don't offer this function. Go into your BIOS setup screen and you should find the option somewhere. D. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Rich Adamson wrote: Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). How do you disable hyper threading (what's the command and where is it placed)? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
...Jens makes a liar out of me, although I read that the 'noht' switch stops the OS from using H/T but doesn't disable it completely. I make no warranties regarding the accuracy of this information, though. D. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On May 16, 2005, at 14:37, Rich Adamson wrote: Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). How do you disable hyper threading (what's the command and where is it placed)? If this is a Linux box, look at the kernel boot arguments in [lilo| grub].conf and append noht, that disables it. My grub.conf on one of my boxes looks like this: title CentOS (2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp) root (hd0,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp ro root=LABEL=/ noht initrd /initrd-2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp.img jens ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
On May 16, 2005, at 14:37, Rich Adamson wrote: Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). How do you disable hyper threading (what's the command and where is it placed)? If this is a Linux box, look at the kernel boot arguments in [lilo| grub].conf and append noht, that disables it. My grub.conf on one of my boxes looks like this: title CentOS (2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp) root (hd0,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp ro root=LABEL=/ noht initrd /initrd-2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp.img Thanks, I added the noht, rebooted, and still get zttest results that consistently at 99.987793%, both before and after the change. Guess hyper threading has nothing to do with it on this particular system. This is a new motherboard and it doesn't indicate anything in the bios relative to hyper threads either. Rich ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
On May 16, 2005, at 19:04, Damian Funnell wrote: ...Jens makes a liar out of me, although I read that the 'noht' switch stops the OS from using H/T but doesn't disable it completely. I make no warranties regarding the accuracy of this information, though. OK, let me rephrase it: After using noht top showed the physical number of CPUs again, not double that. That's the one thing I can confirm! ;) jens ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
Rich, did you check IRQ's? Our zttest results didn't improve markedly when we did either change (IRQ's or H/T), but the problem went away regardless. Other than that Digium have recommended throwing out our SCSI320 RAID hardware and replacing it with IDE (i.e. not SATA) kit, although thankfully we haven't had to make this retarded change (yet). I would also recommend trying to disable H/T in the BIOS (rather than via software) as I wonder if H/T still runs on your box (but is not accessed by the OS), so may still be causing you grief. D. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Rich Adamson wrote: On May 16, 2005, at 14:37, Rich Adamson wrote: Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). How do you disable hyper threading (what's the command and where is it placed)? If this is a Linux box, look at the kernel boot arguments in [lilo| grub].conf and append noht, that disables it. My grub.conf on one of my boxes looks like this: title CentOS (2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp) root (hd0,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp ro root=LABEL=/ noht initrd /initrd-2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp.img Thanks, I added the noht, rebooted, and still get zttest results that consistently at 99.987793%, both before and after the change. Guess hyper threading has nothing to do with it on this particular system. This is a new motherboard and it doesn't indicate anything in the bios relative to hyper threads either. Rich ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
Rich, did you check IRQ's? Our zttest results didn't improve markedly when we did either change (IRQ's or H/T), but the problem went away regardless. Other than that Digium have recommended throwing out our SCSI320 RAID hardware and replacing it with IDE (i.e. not SATA) kit, although thankfully we haven't had to make this retarded change (yet). I would also recommend trying to disable H/T in the BIOS (rather than via software) as I wonder if H/T still runs on your box (but is not accessed by the OS), so may still be causing you grief. Yes, been through the majority of items including irq's, swapped motherboards, ide only, nothing else running, command line only (no frame buffers), upgrade from rhv9 to fedora 3, mucked with pci latency, etc. Had not tried the hyperthread thing until now, but that had no effect either. Even upgraded the TDM card to the latest rev h. Still think its either a bad TDM card design, or, TDM driver issue as to why we can't approach zttest results of 100%. I'm hoping that Steve Underwood's utility to measure the TDM results helps to identify the root cause. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
I have tried disabling H/T, setpci (from Gustavo Alvarez's email), assigning unique IRQs, and swapping PCI slots. Yet, I still get very similar results as: --- Results after 20 passes --- Best: 99.987793 -- Worst: 99.975586 -- Average: 99.986572 The only reason I'm looking into this is because my users are saying that the quality of the calls with the previous PBX was better and clearer. With *, they hear everything fine, but, every once in a while there is like air gaps or white noise that last for fractions of a second. Am I looking in the right place? - Waldo On May 16, 2005, at 6:14 PM, Rich Adamson wrote: Rich, did you check IRQ's? Our zttest results didn't improve markedly when we did either change (IRQ's or H/T), but the problem went away regardless. Other than that Digium have recommended throwing out our SCSI320 RAID hardware and replacing it with IDE (i.e. not SATA) kit, although thankfully we haven't had to make this retarded change (yet). I would also recommend trying to disable H/T in the BIOS (rather than via software) as I wonder if H/T still runs on your box (but is not accessed by the OS), so may still be causing you grief. Yes, been through the majority of items including irq's, swapped motherboards, ide only, nothing else running, command line only (no frame buffers), upgrade from rhv9 to fedora 3, mucked with pci latency, etc. Had not tried the hyperthread thing until now, but that had no effect either. Even upgraded the TDM card to the latest rev h. Still think its either a bad TDM card design, or, TDM driver issue as to why we can't approach zttest results of 100%. I'm hoping that Steve Underwood's utility to measure the TDM results helps to identify the root cause. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Asterisk-Users] zttest
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% 100.00% 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% 100.00% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% --- Results after 57 passes --- Best: 100.00 -- 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). Do you have issues with your * box? If so then I would start worrying about zttest output (and thinking about disabling hyper threading on those dual Xeons), otherwise have a smile and a beer and pity us poor fools who have had problems due to poor results. Cheers, Damian. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Waldo Rubinstein wrote: 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% 100.00% 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% 100.00% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% --- Results after 57 passes --- Best: 100.00 -- 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] zttest
Damian, Thanks for your input. Hyperthreading is in fact enabled and now that you mention this I will disable it. The reason I ask is because under some load (may be 40 simultaneous calls), voice quality degrades. We have audio problems where one party hears the other but not viceversa and then it all works fine. It's random audio quality problems in general. During these cases, I'm constantly running vmstat 1 and CPU utilization is always 85%+ idle. I will also look into setting the TE410P in its own IRQ. Do you know how I can do that? Is that a motherboard BIOS setting or is it something that needs to be done to the TE410P itself? Thanks, Waldo On May 16, 2005, at 12:59 AM, Damian Funnell wrote: Hi Waldo, it really depends on who you ask - Digium say that anything less than 99.99% is going to result in problems, but ours regularly runs at around 99.98% and we don't have any problems. One of our boxes was running at around 99.96% and we had major issues with the voice quality packing up from time to time. We disabled hyper threading and put the TDM400P on its own IRQ and the results came back up over 99.98% (haven't had any problems since). Do you have issues with your * box? If so then I would start worrying about zttest output (and thinking about disabling hyper threading on those dual Xeons), otherwise have a smile and a beer and pity us poor fools who have had problems due to poor results. Cheers, Damian. FFF Managed Technology Ltd 60 Cook St P.O. 6368 Wellesley St Auckland t +64 9 356 2911 f +64 9 358 9070 m +64 21 415 297 w www.fff.co.nz Waldo Rubinstein wrote: 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% 100.00% 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% 100.00% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% --- Results after 57 passes --- Best: 100.00 -- 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com 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 Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Asterisk-Users] zttest never get 100% accurancy
I never get 100% accurancy with zttest. Not even running ztdummy as timing source. Should it really be like that? Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... 98.950195% 99.975586% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.963379% 99.536133% 99.975586% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.548340% 99.975586% 99.975586% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.548340% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.963379% 99.987793% 99.548340% 99.975586% 99.975586% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.548340% 99.975586% 99.975586% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.548340% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.157715% 99.975586% 99.975586% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.548340% --- Results after 40 passes --- Best: 99.987793 -- Worst: 98.950195 Regards, Tobias Jönsson ___ 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
