Peter,
Thank you for your thorough and useful explanation of the various latencies
involved. This is exactly what I was looking for as far as where the problems
are, and maybe a way to fix them. I built a new kernel with Ingo's patch and
it is in testing now, if it is reliable enough, we may
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 11:12:22PM -0700, Tom wrote:
I have a quick question.
I know that running X on an asterisk server is not officially supported,
Generally it shouldn't cause errors, but will probably degregate
performance, as an X server is probably as close as Asterisk is to the
On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 08:57 -0700, Tom wrote:
We don't want to have to spend an extra 3 grand for another
server just to take up more space when we have this box that is sitting here
idle 99% of the time, and as it has worked spectacularly well with the wctdm
cards, I don't see why it can't
Quoting Roger Gulbranson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 08:57 -0700, Tom wrote:
We don't want to have to spend an extra 3 grand for another
server just to take up more space when we have this box that is sitting
here
idle 99% of the time, and as it has worked spectacularly well
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Roger Gulbranson wrote:
On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 08:57 -0700, Tom wrote:
We don't want to have to spend an extra 3 grand for another
server just to take up more space when we have this box that is sitting here
idle 99% of the time, and as it has worked spectacularly
On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 08:57 -0700, Tom wrote:
This box never was primarily an * box, it is a server that people have used
VNC
from windows desktops to run a couple of apps that are X11 only that we need
in
house. We just have been trying to get off of our old PBX, and onto * as our
Quoting Tzafrir Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 11:12:22PM -0700, Tom wrote:
I have a quick question.
I know that running X on an asterisk server is not officially supported,
Generally it shouldn't cause errors, but will probably degregate
performance, as an X server is
Quoting Peter Svensson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Roger Gulbranson wrote:
On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 08:57 -0700, Tom wrote:
We don't want to have to spend an extra 3 grand for another
server just to take up more space when we have this box that is sitting
here
idle 99% of
Tom wrote:
This is what I have suspected all along is that the signaling and timing
constraints on the PRI are such that you basically need asterisk running as a
real-time process. The whole point of the thread (in my mind) is if there is
anyway to cause X to not run as such a real-time process
