Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[Grant Saicom]

Hello Everyone

I have the answer to the speed issues I have been encountering for the last 2 
months.

The issue was access speeds on the dlr table which is used as temporary 
storage. This was corrected by adding an index on the smsc which dramatically 
increased speeds.

Whats good to know for a kannel with sqlbox is that it is not necessary to use 
a SQL table for dlr storage (setting dlr-storage in kannel.conf). It is better 
to use a spool file based inside an ext2 partition for good speed.

To identify this issue (and possibly a lot of others), you need to watch the 
actual network traffic using something like tshark.

A healthy smpp communication (excluding other DLRs) will have the following 
order (assuming max-pending-submit=10) 
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK

You will see that kannel sends its first 10, then waits for the 
acknowledgements before sending more.

kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
kannel -> SMSC: submit_sm
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK
SMSC -> kannel: submit_sm : Resp OK

This out of sequence behaviour indicated that there was a delay occurring 
somewhere and in our case, it was the updates to the dlr storage.

I really hope this helps other people out there.

Regards
Grant
> On 13 Jan 2016, at 17:30, Grant Saicom  wrote:
> 
> I might have the wrong end of the stick here, but I was under the impression 
> that kannel/bearerbox used openSMPP libraries to implement its smpp 
> functionality. I have done a bit of googling and cannot see anything 
> confirming this. So I guess this is not the case :)
> 
> With respect to mtr (both gateways are same device, juniper mx-140 with dual 
> 10Gbit direct connection to blade hypervisor data fabric):
>  HostLoss%   Snt   Last   Avg  
> Best  Wrst StDev
>  1. smsc-gateway0.0%950.4   0.5   0.3   0.9   
> 0.0
>  2. kannel 0.0%940.8   0.6   0.4  
>  1.0   0.0
> 
>  HostLoss%   Snt   Last   Avg  
> Best  Wrst StDev
>  1. kannel-gateway  0.0%730.4   0.3   0.3   0.5   
> 0.0
>  2. smsc   0.0%720.5   0.6   0.4  
>  2.7   0.4
> 
> Average on both is sub 1ms. MTU are is 1500 on both.
> 
> I am loathe to think it is the hypervisor or hardware as it is all service 
> provider grade. I have a spare HP DL380 in the rack at the DC which was 
> scheduled for collection. I may just wipe that and put kannel there and see 
> how it behaves there.
> 
> Thank you for the advice.
>> On 13 Jan 2016, at 15:09, spameden > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2016-01-13 15:14 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom > >:
>> Thanks for the advice.
>> 
>> Which smpp implementation does kannel code ship with from the repo? Just 
>> want to clarify as it sounds it isn’t opensmpp in the answer.
>> 
>> Why do you even ask about opensmppbox? I thought original question was about 
>> sqlbox. OpenSMPPBox is basically a simple proxy to kannel for outside 
>> clients. There is not much in it, there is no flow control or accounting. 
>> What bearerbox/kannel implements for smsc is basically what opensmppbox 
>> offers in terms of connections to upstream links.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> With regards to network, all the machines are on the same subnet, including 
>> the smsc. We have an instance within our network. On top of that, they are 
>> all on the same hypervisor and data fabric.
>> 
>> Another thought I just got: could your network problems be due your 
>> virtualization used? Try using kannel on a bare machine and see if there is 
>> any TCP retransmissions going?
>> 
>> Did you check mtr output as well to your upstream smsc? And also check 
>> reverse 

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[Grant Saicom]

I suspect the issue I am still experiencing is because of TCP retransmission 
between Kannel and SMSC. The time out for ack is 210ms on the SMSC we are 
sending to and the delay can sometimes be as long as 370ms.

I have not found a solution, but am exploring further optimisations and avenues.

Another Kannel user advised me saying that openSMPP can be problematic some 
times. Is this a generally known and confirmed issue?

Kind regards
Grant
> On 15 Dec 2015, at 12:53, spameden  wrote:
> 
> store-type = spool
> store-location = "/tmp/kannel-spool/"
> 
> put these 2 lines below group = core in /etc/kannel/kannel.conf
> 
> do you use for dlr MySQL as well?
> 
> worth adding index on dlr table as well: KEY `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`) 
> 
> ALTER table dlr add index `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`);
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2015-12-15 13:43 GMT+03:00 spameden  >:
> Yes.
> 
> The only thing that comes to my mind is to use kannel-store = spool and move 
> your spool store to /tmp dir, this way queue will be in multiple files 
> instead of the single file and in RAM, I found this way it's very fast.
> 
> Let me know if it helps.
> 
> If you want to preserve queue (in case of hard reset or something) you can 
> rsync it's contents every 2 minutes or so in some permanent directory.
> 
> 2015-12-15 12:56 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom  >:
> Haven’t really found my answer yet, but I have another question along this 
> line of thought.
> 
> I see the queue in sqlbox rises quite high, but the queue in the smpp 
> connector to the smsc barely goes above 0.
> 
> Is there a way to control.modify the flow of messages from sqlbox to the smpp 
> queue?
> 
> Architecturally, is this correct in terms of the flow of messages:
> sqlbox queue -> bearerbox sms store-> smpp queue
> 
> Regards
> Grant
> 
>> On 09 Dec 2015, at 11:56, spameden > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2015-12-09 12:43 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom > >:
>> We process the sent_sms into another table on they fly. Maximum size the 
>> sent_sms table gets is maybe 40k tops but mostly it averages around 10K. We 
>> see this once 1 week maybe.
>> 
>> I have really made every attempt to remove any bottlenecks in terms unwieldy 
>> database sizes to allow kannel to work in a favourable environment.
>> 
>> Is there reason to add multiple sqlboxes to feed bearer box?
>> 
>> Is there maybe a concurrency setting I can do for bearer box to receive the 
>> messages? I did not come across documentation aside from email posts with 
>> respect to the limit-per-cycle setting.
>> 
>> I have another question, would we be able to get faster performance if we 
>> went flat file for the kannel operations?
>> 
>> Well you can exclude bottlenecks by simply testing same setup with fakesmsc 
>> daemon and see if speed will be better.
>> 
>> It might be that delay is caused by your SMSC uplinks overall speed and not 
>> database.
>> 
>> You can also try classic smsbox implementation for sending instead of 
>> sqlbox. But I think sqlbox is fastest and more convinient way because of DB 
>> storage.
>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> 
>>> On 08 Dec 2015, at 15:12, spameden >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2015-12-08 12:51 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg >> >:
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> We manage how big send_sms gets. The queue builder puts in 500 messages at 
>>> a time to a total maximum of 3000 from a larger main queue which can go as 
>>> big as 2M.
>>> 
>>> 2M is kinda big table, how big is sent_sms? 10-30M ?
>>> 
>>> I think your issue happens when kannel tries to move from send_sms to 
>>> sent_sms table already submitted message this is where it hangs. You can 
>>> try testing it yourself with simple query:
>>> 
>>> INSERT INTO sent_sms SELECT * from send_sms where sql_id= and measure 
>>> time per query.
>>> 
>>> if it's instant there should be no problem.
>>> 
>>> Generally it's better to leave sent_sms table at around 1M records not 
>>> more, old records you can move to other table daily.
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Actual hardware is a VCenter on blades with plenty ram, cpu and hp 
>>> 3PAR(144GB raid card ram for caching in total) fibre attached storage with 
>>> dedicated SSD specifically for DB. Calculated IOPS are stupidly good.
>>> 
>>> The VMs are as follows:
>>> Queuebuilder: 4 vcpu, 16Gb on SAS
>>> Kannel: 4 vcpu, 8GB on SAS
>>> MysqlDB-Master: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD
>>> MysqlDB-Slave: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD
>>> 
>>> MySQL on SSDs should work just fine and you should have big number of iops. 
>>> Btw, I recommend to use MariaDB instead of regular MySQL (mariadb.org 
>>> ) it's very fast and reliable, for InnoDB it uses 
>>> 

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[spameden]

2016-01-13 15:14 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :

> Thanks for the advice.
>
> Which smpp implementation does kannel code ship with from the repo? Just
> want to clarify as it sounds it isn’t opensmpp in the answer.
>

Why do you even ask about opensmppbox? I thought original question was
about sqlbox. OpenSMPPBox is basically a simple proxy to kannel for outside
clients. There is not much in it, there is no flow control or accounting.
What bearerbox/kannel implements for smsc is basically what opensmppbox
offers in terms of connections to upstream links.



> With regards to network, all the machines are on the same subnet,
> including the smsc. We have an instance within our network. On top of that,
> they are all on the same hypervisor and data fabric.
>

Another thought I just got: could your network problems be due your
virtualization used? Try using kannel on a bare machine and see if there is
any TCP retransmissions going?

Did you check mtr output as well to your upstream smsc? And also check
reverse network path if it's same or not.




>
> On 13 Jan 2016, at 14:02, spameden  wrote:
>
> opensmppbox is generally not recommended for production, it's very basic
> and there is no accounting at all, for SMPP-server I'd recommended
> contacting Stipe Tolk (you can find his e-mail on the lists archive in
> google), he has commercial solution carrier-grade.
>
> about TCP retransmissions you might need tuning either Linux network
> settings, e.g. MTU if you're behind some sorta NAT or better contact your
> provider with mtr output and tcpdump captures there might be unoptimal
> direct or/and reverse network path between you and your SMSC provider.
>
> 2016-01-13 14:07 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :
>
>> I suspect the issue I am still experiencing is because of TCP
>> retransmission between Kannel and SMSC. The time out for ack is 210ms on
>> the SMSC we are sending to and the delay can sometimes be as long as 370ms.
>>
>> I have not found a solution, but am exploring further optimisations and
>> avenues.
>>
>> Another Kannel user advised me saying that openSMPP can be problematic
>> some times. Is this a generally known and confirmed issue?
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Grant
>>
>> On 15 Dec 2015, at 12:53, spameden  wrote:
>>
>> store-type = spool
>> store-location = "/tmp/kannel-spool/"
>>
>> put these 2 lines below group = core in /etc/kannel/kannel.conf
>>
>> do you use for dlr MySQL as well?
>>
>> worth adding index on dlr table as well: KEY `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`)
>>
>> ALTER table dlr add index `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`);
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2015-12-15 13:43 GMT+03:00 spameden :
>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>> The only thing that comes to my mind is to use kannel-store = spool and
>>> move your spool store to /tmp dir, this way queue will be in multiple files
>>> instead of the single file and in RAM, I found this way it's very fast.
>>>
>>> Let me know if it helps.
>>>
>>> If you want to preserve queue (in case of hard reset or something) you
>>> can rsync it's contents every 2 minutes or so in some permanent directory.
>>>
>>> 2015-12-15 12:56 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :
>>>
 Haven’t really found my answer yet, but I have another question along
 this line of thought.

 I see the queue in sqlbox rises quite high, but the queue in the smpp
 connector to the smsc barely goes above 0.

 Is there a way to control.modify the flow of messages from sqlbox to
 the smpp queue?

 Architecturally, is this correct in terms of the flow of messages:
 sqlbox queue -> bearerbox sms store-> smpp queue

 Regards
 Grant

 On 09 Dec 2015, at 11:56, spameden  wrote:



 2015-12-09 12:43 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :

> We process the sent_sms into another table on they fly. Maximum size
> the sent_sms table gets is maybe 40k tops but mostly it averages around
> 10K. We see this once 1 week maybe.
>
> I have really made every attempt to remove any bottlenecks in terms
> unwieldy database sizes to allow kannel to work in a favourable 
> environment.
>
> Is there reason to add multiple sqlboxes to feed bearer box?
>
> Is there maybe a concurrency setting I can do for bearer box to
> receive the messages? I did not come across documentation aside from email
> posts with respect to the limit-per-cycle setting.
>
> I have another question, would we be able to get faster performance if
> we went flat file for the kannel operations?
>

 Well you can exclude bottlenecks by simply testing same setup with
 fakesmsc daemon and see if speed will be better.

 It might be that delay is caused by your SMSC uplinks overall speed and
 not database.

 You can also try classic smsbox implementation for sending instead of
 

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[spameden]

opensmppbox is generally not recommended for production, it's very basic
and there is no accounting at all, for SMPP-server I'd recommended
contacting Stipe Tolk (you can find his e-mail on the lists archive in
google), he has commercial solution carrier-grade.

about TCP retransmissions you might need tuning either Linux network
settings, e.g. MTU if you're behind some sorta NAT or better contact your
provider with mtr output and tcpdump captures there might be unoptimal
direct or/and reverse network path between you and your SMSC provider.

2016-01-13 14:07 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :

> I suspect the issue I am still experiencing is because of TCP
> retransmission between Kannel and SMSC. The time out for ack is 210ms on
> the SMSC we are sending to and the delay can sometimes be as long as 370ms.
>
> I have not found a solution, but am exploring further optimisations and
> avenues.
>
> Another Kannel user advised me saying that openSMPP can be problematic
> some times. Is this a generally known and confirmed issue?
>
> Kind regards
> Grant
>
> On 15 Dec 2015, at 12:53, spameden  wrote:
>
> store-type = spool
> store-location = "/tmp/kannel-spool/"
>
> put these 2 lines below group = core in /etc/kannel/kannel.conf
>
> do you use for dlr MySQL as well?
>
> worth adding index on dlr table as well: KEY `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`)
>
> ALTER table dlr add index `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`);
>
>
>
>
> 2015-12-15 13:43 GMT+03:00 spameden :
>
>> Yes.
>>
>> The only thing that comes to my mind is to use kannel-store = spool and
>> move your spool store to /tmp dir, this way queue will be in multiple files
>> instead of the single file and in RAM, I found this way it's very fast.
>>
>> Let me know if it helps.
>>
>> If you want to preserve queue (in case of hard reset or something) you
>> can rsync it's contents every 2 minutes or so in some permanent directory.
>>
>> 2015-12-15 12:56 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :
>>
>>> Haven’t really found my answer yet, but I have another question along
>>> this line of thought.
>>>
>>> I see the queue in sqlbox rises quite high, but the queue in the smpp
>>> connector to the smsc barely goes above 0.
>>>
>>> Is there a way to control.modify the flow of messages from sqlbox to the
>>> smpp queue?
>>>
>>> Architecturally, is this correct in terms of the flow of messages:
>>> sqlbox queue -> bearerbox sms store-> smpp queue
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Grant
>>>
>>> On 09 Dec 2015, at 11:56, spameden  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2015-12-09 12:43 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :
>>>
 We process the sent_sms into another table on they fly. Maximum size
 the sent_sms table gets is maybe 40k tops but mostly it averages around
 10K. We see this once 1 week maybe.

 I have really made every attempt to remove any bottlenecks in terms
 unwieldy database sizes to allow kannel to work in a favourable 
 environment.

 Is there reason to add multiple sqlboxes to feed bearer box?

 Is there maybe a concurrency setting I can do for bearer box to receive
 the messages? I did not come across documentation aside from email posts
 with respect to the limit-per-cycle setting.

 I have another question, would we be able to get faster performance if
 we went flat file for the kannel operations?

>>>
>>> Well you can exclude bottlenecks by simply testing same setup with
>>> fakesmsc daemon and see if speed will be better.
>>>
>>> It might be that delay is caused by your SMSC uplinks overall speed and
>>> not database.
>>>
>>> You can also try classic smsbox implementation for sending instead of
>>> sqlbox. But I think sqlbox is fastest and more convinient way because of DB
>>> storage.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

 Regards


 On 08 Dec 2015, at 15:12, spameden  wrote:



 2015-12-08 12:51 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg :

> 
> 
>
> Hi
>
> We manage how big send_sms gets. The queue builder puts in 500
> messages at a time to a total maximum of 3000 from a larger main queue
> which can go as big as 2M.
>

 2M is kinda big table, how big is sent_sms? 10-30M ?

 I think your issue happens when kannel tries to move from send_sms to
 sent_sms table already submitted message this is where it hangs. You can
 try testing it yourself with simple query:

 INSERT INTO sent_sms SELECT * from send_sms where sql_id= and
 measure time per query.

 if it's instant there should be no problem.

 Generally it's better to leave sent_sms table at around 1M records not
 more, old records you can move to other table daily.


>
> Actual hardware is a VCenter on blades with plenty ram, cpu and hp
> 3PAR(144GB raid card ram for caching 

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[Grant Saicom]

Thanks for the advice.

Which smpp implementation does kannel code ship with from the repo? Just want 
to clarify as it sounds it isn’t opensmpp in the answer.

With regards to network, all the machines are on the same subnet, including the 
smsc. We have an instance within our network. On top of that, they are all on 
the same hypervisor and data fabric.

> On 13 Jan 2016, at 14:02, spameden  wrote:
> 
> opensmppbox is generally not recommended for production, it's very basic and 
> there is no accounting at all, for SMPP-server I'd recommended contacting 
> Stipe Tolk (you can find his e-mail on the lists archive in google), he has 
> commercial solution carrier-grade.
> 
> about TCP retransmissions you might need tuning either Linux network 
> settings, e.g. MTU if you're behind some sorta NAT or better contact your 
> provider with mtr output and tcpdump captures there might be unoptimal direct 
> or/and reverse network path between you and your SMSC provider.
> 
> 2016-01-13 14:07 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom  >:
> I suspect the issue I am still experiencing is because of TCP retransmission 
> between Kannel and SMSC. The time out for ack is 210ms on the SMSC we are 
> sending to and the delay can sometimes be as long as 370ms.
> 
> I have not found a solution, but am exploring further optimisations and 
> avenues.
> 
> Another Kannel user advised me saying that openSMPP can be problematic some 
> times. Is this a generally known and confirmed issue?
> 
> Kind regards
> Grant
> 
>> On 15 Dec 2015, at 12:53, spameden > > wrote:
>> 
>> store-type = spool
>> store-location = "/tmp/kannel-spool/"
>> 
>> put these 2 lines below group = core in /etc/kannel/kannel.conf
>> 
>> do you use for dlr MySQL as well?
>> 
>> worth adding index on dlr table as well: KEY `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`) 
>> 
>> ALTER table dlr add index `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`);
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2015-12-15 13:43 GMT+03:00 spameden > >:
>> Yes.
>> 
>> The only thing that comes to my mind is to use kannel-store = spool and move 
>> your spool store to /tmp dir, this way queue will be in multiple files 
>> instead of the single file and in RAM, I found this way it's very fast.
>> 
>> Let me know if it helps.
>> 
>> If you want to preserve queue (in case of hard reset or something) you can 
>> rsync it's contents every 2 minutes or so in some permanent directory.
>> 
>> 2015-12-15 12:56 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom > >:
>> Haven’t really found my answer yet, but I have another question along this 
>> line of thought.
>> 
>> I see the queue in sqlbox rises quite high, but the queue in the smpp 
>> connector to the smsc barely goes above 0.
>> 
>> Is there a way to control.modify the flow of messages from sqlbox to the 
>> smpp queue?
>> 
>> Architecturally, is this correct in terms of the flow of messages:
>> sqlbox queue -> bearerbox sms store-> smpp queue
>> 
>> Regards
>> Grant
>> 
>>> On 09 Dec 2015, at 11:56, spameden >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2015-12-09 12:43 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom >> >:
>>> We process the sent_sms into another table on they fly. Maximum size the 
>>> sent_sms table gets is maybe 40k tops but mostly it averages around 10K. We 
>>> see this once 1 week maybe.
>>> 
>>> I have really made every attempt to remove any bottlenecks in terms 
>>> unwieldy database sizes to allow kannel to work in a favourable environment.
>>> 
>>> Is there reason to add multiple sqlboxes to feed bearer box?
>>> 
>>> Is there maybe a concurrency setting I can do for bearer box to receive the 
>>> messages? I did not come across documentation aside from email posts with 
>>> respect to the limit-per-cycle setting.
>>> 
>>> I have another question, would we be able to get faster performance if we 
>>> went flat file for the kannel operations?
>>> 
>>> Well you can exclude bottlenecks by simply testing same setup with fakesmsc 
>>> daemon and see if speed will be better.
>>> 
>>> It might be that delay is caused by your SMSC uplinks overall speed and not 
>>> database.
>>> 
>>> You can also try classic smsbox implementation for sending instead of 
>>> sqlbox. But I think sqlbox is fastest and more convinient way because of DB 
>>> storage.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> 
>>> 
 On 08 Dec 2015, at 15:12, spameden > wrote:
 
 
 
 2015-12-08 12:51 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg >:
  
 
 
 Hi
 
 We manage how big send_sms gets. The queue builder puts in 500 messages at 
 a time to a total maximum of 3000 from a larger 

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[spameden]

2016-01-13 18:30 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :

> I might have the wrong end of the stick here, but I was under the
> impression that kannel/bearerbox used openSMPP libraries to implement its
> smpp functionality. I have done a bit of googling and cannot see anything
> confirming this. So I guess this is not the case :)
>

No. Kannel is basically is a set of bearerbox, smsbox, wapbox.

sqlbox is a box too as well.

opensmppbox is kinda -box too.

each *box is connected to bearerbox or sometimes sqlbox connected to smsbox
for further processing.

each *box got its own functionality, but main thing is bearerbox which
routes all messages / manages your smsc uplinks and processing own internal
queues.

so if you want to just send messages through kannel you need only:

1) bearerbox
2) sqlbox

you just insert into send_sms your MT message with certain values in fields
and it's submitted to bearerbox, which sends it to upstream SMSC you
specified (smsc_id field).

this is basically how it works.


> With respect to mtr (both gateways are same device, juniper mx-140 with
> dual 10Gbit direct connection to blade hypervisor data fabric):
>  HostLoss%   Snt   Last   Avg
>  Best  Wrst StDev
>  1. smsc-gateway0.0%950.4   0.5   0.3
> 0.9   0.0
>  2. kannel 0.0%940.8   0.6
> 0.4   1.0   0.0
>
>  HostLoss%   Snt   Last   Avg
>  Best  Wrst StDev
>  1. kannel-gateway  0.0%730.4   0.3   0.3
> 0.5   0.0
>  2. smsc   0.0%720.5   0.6
> 0.4   2.7   0.4
>

Better run mtr for at least 1000 packets, but I guess since both hosts are
on the same network there shouldn't be any problem.


>
> Average on both is sub 1ms. MTU are is 1500 on both.
>

What's the software on SMSC server? Or It's some commercial solution? It
could be this is the problem.


>
> I am loathe to think it is the hypervisor or hardware as it is all service
> provider grade. I have a spare HP DL380 in the rack at the DC which was
> scheduled for collection. I may just wipe that and put kannel there and see
> how it behaves there.
>

Waiting for your results.


>
> Thank you for the advice.
>
> On 13 Jan 2016, at 15:09, spameden  wrote:
>
>
>
> 2016-01-13 15:14 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :
>
>> Thanks for the advice.
>>
>> Which smpp implementation does kannel code ship with from the repo? Just
>> want to clarify as it sounds it isn’t opensmpp in the answer.
>>
>
> Why do you even ask about opensmppbox? I thought original question was
> about sqlbox. OpenSMPPBox is basically a simple proxy to kannel for outside
> clients. There is not much in it, there is no flow control or accounting.
> What bearerbox/kannel implements for smsc is basically what opensmppbox
> offers in terms of connections to upstream links.
>
>
>
>> With regards to network, all the machines are on the same subnet,
>> including the smsc. We have an instance within our network. On top of that,
>> they are all on the same hypervisor and data fabric.
>>
>
> Another thought I just got: could your network problems be due your
> virtualization used? Try using kannel on a bare machine and see if there is
> any TCP retransmissions going?
>
> Did you check mtr output as well to your upstream smsc? And also check
> reverse network path if it's same or not.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> On 13 Jan 2016, at 14:02, spameden  wrote:
>>
>> opensmppbox is generally not recommended for production, it's very basic
>> and there is no accounting at all, for SMPP-server I'd recommended
>> contacting Stipe Tolk (you can find his e-mail on the lists archive in
>> google), he has commercial solution carrier-grade.
>>
>> about TCP retransmissions you might need tuning either Linux network
>> settings, e.g. MTU if you're behind some sorta NAT or better contact your
>> provider with mtr output and tcpdump captures there might be unoptimal
>> direct or/and reverse network path between you and your SMSC provider.
>>
>> 2016-01-13 14:07 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :
>>
>>> I suspect the issue I am still experiencing is because of TCP
>>> retransmission between Kannel and SMSC. The time out for ack is 210ms on
>>> the SMSC we are sending to and the delay can sometimes be as long as 370ms.
>>>
>>> I have not found a solution, but am exploring further optimisations and
>>> avenues.
>>>
>>> Another Kannel user advised me saying that openSMPP can be problematic
>>> some times. Is this a generally known and confirmed issue?
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>> Grant
>>>
>>> On 15 Dec 2015, at 12:53, spameden  wrote:
>>>
>>> store-type = spool
>>> store-location = "/tmp/kannel-spool/"
>>>
>>> put these 2 lines below group = core in /etc/kannel/kannel.conf
>>>
>>> do you use for dlr MySQL as well?
>>>
>>> worth 

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[Grant Saicom]

I might have the wrong end of the stick here, but I was under the impression 
that kannel/bearerbox used openSMPP libraries to implement its smpp 
functionality. I have done a bit of googling and cannot see anything confirming 
this. So I guess this is not the case :)

With respect to mtr (both gateways are same device, juniper mx-140 with dual 
10Gbit direct connection to blade hypervisor data fabric):
 HostLoss%   Snt   Last   Avg  Best 
 Wrst StDev
 1. smsc-gateway0.0%950.4   0.5   0.3   0.9   
0.0
 2. kannel 0.0%940.8   0.6   0.4   
1.0   0.0

 HostLoss%   Snt   Last   Avg  Best 
 Wrst StDev
 1. kannel-gateway  0.0%730.4   0.3   0.3   0.5   
0.0
 2. smsc   0.0%720.5   0.6   0.4   
2.7   0.4

Average on both is sub 1ms. MTU are is 1500 on both.

I am loathe to think it is the hypervisor or hardware as it is all service 
provider grade. I have a spare HP DL380 in the rack at the DC which was 
scheduled for collection. I may just wipe that and put kannel there and see how 
it behaves there.

Thank you for the advice.
> On 13 Jan 2016, at 15:09, spameden  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 2016-01-13 15:14 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom  >:
> Thanks for the advice.
> 
> Which smpp implementation does kannel code ship with from the repo? Just want 
> to clarify as it sounds it isn’t opensmpp in the answer.
> 
> Why do you even ask about opensmppbox? I thought original question was about 
> sqlbox. OpenSMPPBox is basically a simple proxy to kannel for outside 
> clients. There is not much in it, there is no flow control or accounting. 
> What bearerbox/kannel implements for smsc is basically what opensmppbox 
> offers in terms of connections to upstream links.
> 
> 
> 
> With regards to network, all the machines are on the same subnet, including 
> the smsc. We have an instance within our network. On top of that, they are 
> all on the same hypervisor and data fabric.
> 
> Another thought I just got: could your network problems be due your 
> virtualization used? Try using kannel on a bare machine and see if there is 
> any TCP retransmissions going?
> 
> Did you check mtr output as well to your upstream smsc? And also check 
> reverse network path if it's same or not.
>  
> 
>  
> 
>> On 13 Jan 2016, at 14:02, spameden > > wrote:
>> 
>> opensmppbox is generally not recommended for production, it's very basic and 
>> there is no accounting at all, for SMPP-server I'd recommended contacting 
>> Stipe Tolk (you can find his e-mail on the lists archive in google), he has 
>> commercial solution carrier-grade.
>> 
>> about TCP retransmissions you might need tuning either Linux network 
>> settings, e.g. MTU if you're behind some sorta NAT or better contact your 
>> provider with mtr output and tcpdump captures there might be unoptimal 
>> direct or/and reverse network path between you and your SMSC provider.
>> 
>> 2016-01-13 14:07 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom > >:
>> I suspect the issue I am still experiencing is because of TCP retransmission 
>> between Kannel and SMSC. The time out for ack is 210ms on the SMSC we are 
>> sending to and the delay can sometimes be as long as 370ms.
>> 
>> I have not found a solution, but am exploring further optimisations and 
>> avenues.
>> 
>> Another Kannel user advised me saying that openSMPP can be problematic some 
>> times. Is this a generally known and confirmed issue?
>> 
>> Kind regards
>> Grant
>> 
>>> On 15 Dec 2015, at 12:53, spameden >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> store-type = spool
>>> store-location = "/tmp/kannel-spool/"
>>> 
>>> put these 2 lines below group = core in /etc/kannel/kannel.conf
>>> 
>>> do you use for dlr MySQL as well?
>>> 
>>> worth adding index on dlr table as well: KEY `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`) 
>>> 
>>> ALTER table dlr add index `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`);
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2015-12-15 13:43 GMT+03:00 spameden >> >:
>>> Yes.
>>> 
>>> The only thing that comes to my mind is to use kannel-store = spool and 
>>> move your spool store to /tmp dir, this way queue will be in multiple files 
>>> instead of the single file and in RAM, I found this way it's very fast.
>>> 
>>> Let me know if it helps.
>>> 
>>> If you want to preserve queue (in case of hard reset or something) you can 
>>> rsync it's contents every 2 minutes or so in some permanent directory.
>>> 
>>> 2015-12-15 12:56 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom >> >:
>>> Haven’t really found my answer yet, but I have another question along this 
>>> line of thought.
>>> 
>>> I see 

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[spameden]

Yes.

The only thing that comes to my mind is to use kannel-store = spool and
move your spool store to /tmp dir, this way queue will be in multiple files
instead of the single file and in RAM, I found this way it's very fast.

Let me know if it helps.

If you want to preserve queue (in case of hard reset or something) you can
rsync it's contents every 2 minutes or so in some permanent directory.

2015-12-15 12:56 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :

> Haven’t really found my answer yet, but I have another question along this
> line of thought.
>
> I see the queue in sqlbox rises quite high, but the queue in the smpp
> connector to the smsc barely goes above 0.
>
> Is there a way to control.modify the flow of messages from sqlbox to the
> smpp queue?
>
> Architecturally, is this correct in terms of the flow of messages:
> sqlbox queue -> bearerbox sms store-> smpp queue
>
> Regards
> Grant
>
> On 09 Dec 2015, at 11:56, spameden  wrote:
>
>
>
> 2015-12-09 12:43 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :
>
>> We process the sent_sms into another table on they fly. Maximum size the
>> sent_sms table gets is maybe 40k tops but mostly it averages around 10K. We
>> see this once 1 week maybe.
>>
>> I have really made every attempt to remove any bottlenecks in terms
>> unwieldy database sizes to allow kannel to work in a favourable environment.
>>
>> Is there reason to add multiple sqlboxes to feed bearer box?
>>
>> Is there maybe a concurrency setting I can do for bearer box to receive
>> the messages? I did not come across documentation aside from email posts
>> with respect to the limit-per-cycle setting.
>>
>> I have another question, would we be able to get faster performance if we
>> went flat file for the kannel operations?
>>
>
> Well you can exclude bottlenecks by simply testing same setup with
> fakesmsc daemon and see if speed will be better.
>
> It might be that delay is caused by your SMSC uplinks overall speed and
> not database.
>
> You can also try classic smsbox implementation for sending instead of
> sqlbox. But I think sqlbox is fastest and more convinient way because of DB
> storage.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> On 08 Dec 2015, at 15:12, spameden  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> 2015-12-08 12:51 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg :
>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> We manage how big send_sms gets. The queue builder puts in 500 messages
>>> at a time to a total maximum of 3000 from a larger main queue which can go
>>> as big as 2M.
>>>
>>
>> 2M is kinda big table, how big is sent_sms? 10-30M ?
>>
>> I think your issue happens when kannel tries to move from send_sms to
>> sent_sms table already submitted message this is where it hangs. You can
>> try testing it yourself with simple query:
>>
>> INSERT INTO sent_sms SELECT * from send_sms where sql_id= and measure
>> time per query.
>>
>> if it's instant there should be no problem.
>>
>> Generally it's better to leave sent_sms table at around 1M records not
>> more, old records you can move to other table daily.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Actual hardware is a VCenter on blades with plenty ram, cpu and hp
>>> 3PAR(144GB raid card ram for caching in total) fibre attached storage with
>>> dedicated SSD specifically for DB. Calculated IOPS are stupidly good.
>>>
>>> The VMs are as follows:
>>> Queuebuilder: 4 vcpu, 16Gb on SAS
>>> Kannel: 4 vcpu, 8GB on SAS
>>> MysqlDB-Master: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD
>>> MysqlDB-Slave: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD
>>>
>>
>> MySQL on SSDs should work just fine and you should have big number of
>> iops. Btw, I recommend to use MariaDB instead of regular MySQL (
>> mariadb.org) it's very fast and reliable, for InnoDB it uses modified
>> XtraDB engine which has some tweaks.
>>
>> did you check mysqladmin status to indicate number of queries processed
>> per second?
>>
>>
>>> The Load on the MysqlDB-Master averages around 0.4 with max of 0.6
>>> (single spike). Memory usage hangs around 24GB. I will need to check the
>>> process list to double check, but we generally don’t see much strain here
>>> either, but I stand to be corrected.
>>>
>> DB optimasations as follows:
>>>
>>> key_buffer   = 16M
>>> max_allowed_packet   = 16M
>>>
>>
>> maybe increase a bit max_allowed_packet to 64mb
>>
>> innodb_buffer_pool_size = 12G
>>>
>>
>> this is fine
>>
>> query_cache_limit   = 20M
>>> query_cache_size = 128M
>>>
>>
>> query_cache in kannel's case doesn't affect much, so it's ok to have it
>> like that.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> No extra indexes on the send_sms as we limit its size to 3000.
>>>
>>
>> make sure both send_sms and sent_sms tables are InnoDB type.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> All reporting is done on the slaveDB, so no extra strain on monitoring
>>> and reporting.
>>>
>>
>> under 'reporting' do you mean your dlr_url is called to external script
>> which is connected to slaveDB?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Historically, we have queued at the 

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[spameden]

store-type = spool
store-location = "/tmp/kannel-spool/"

put these 2 lines below group = core in /etc/kannel/kannel.conf

do you use for dlr MySQL as well?

worth adding index on dlr table as well: KEY `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`)

ALTER table dlr add index `smsc_ts` (`smsc`,`ts`);




2015-12-15 13:43 GMT+03:00 spameden :

> Yes.
>
> The only thing that comes to my mind is to use kannel-store = spool and
> move your spool store to /tmp dir, this way queue will be in multiple files
> instead of the single file and in RAM, I found this way it's very fast.
>
> Let me know if it helps.
>
> If you want to preserve queue (in case of hard reset or something) you can
> rsync it's contents every 2 minutes or so in some permanent directory.
>
> 2015-12-15 12:56 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :
>
>> Haven’t really found my answer yet, but I have another question along
>> this line of thought.
>>
>> I see the queue in sqlbox rises quite high, but the queue in the smpp
>> connector to the smsc barely goes above 0.
>>
>> Is there a way to control.modify the flow of messages from sqlbox to the
>> smpp queue?
>>
>> Architecturally, is this correct in terms of the flow of messages:
>> sqlbox queue -> bearerbox sms store-> smpp queue
>>
>> Regards
>> Grant
>>
>> On 09 Dec 2015, at 11:56, spameden  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> 2015-12-09 12:43 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :
>>
>>> We process the sent_sms into another table on they fly. Maximum size the
>>> sent_sms table gets is maybe 40k tops but mostly it averages around 10K. We
>>> see this once 1 week maybe.
>>>
>>> I have really made every attempt to remove any bottlenecks in terms
>>> unwieldy database sizes to allow kannel to work in a favourable environment.
>>>
>>> Is there reason to add multiple sqlboxes to feed bearer box?
>>>
>>> Is there maybe a concurrency setting I can do for bearer box to receive
>>> the messages? I did not come across documentation aside from email posts
>>> with respect to the limit-per-cycle setting.
>>>
>>> I have another question, would we be able to get faster performance if
>>> we went flat file for the kannel operations?
>>>
>>
>> Well you can exclude bottlenecks by simply testing same setup with
>> fakesmsc daemon and see if speed will be better.
>>
>> It might be that delay is caused by your SMSC uplinks overall speed and
>> not database.
>>
>> You can also try classic smsbox implementation for sending instead of
>> sqlbox. But I think sqlbox is fastest and more convinient way because of DB
>> storage.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08 Dec 2015, at 15:12, spameden  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2015-12-08 12:51 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg :
>>>
 
 

 Hi

 We manage how big send_sms gets. The queue builder puts in 500 messages
 at a time to a total maximum of 3000 from a larger main queue which can go
 as big as 2M.

>>>
>>> 2M is kinda big table, how big is sent_sms? 10-30M ?
>>>
>>> I think your issue happens when kannel tries to move from send_sms to
>>> sent_sms table already submitted message this is where it hangs. You can
>>> try testing it yourself with simple query:
>>>
>>> INSERT INTO sent_sms SELECT * from send_sms where sql_id= and
>>> measure time per query.
>>>
>>> if it's instant there should be no problem.
>>>
>>> Generally it's better to leave sent_sms table at around 1M records not
>>> more, old records you can move to other table daily.
>>>
>>>

 Actual hardware is a VCenter on blades with plenty ram, cpu and hp
 3PAR(144GB raid card ram for caching in total) fibre attached storage with
 dedicated SSD specifically for DB. Calculated IOPS are stupidly good.

 The VMs are as follows:
 Queuebuilder: 4 vcpu, 16Gb on SAS
 Kannel: 4 vcpu, 8GB on SAS
 MysqlDB-Master: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD
 MysqlDB-Slave: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD

>>>
>>> MySQL on SSDs should work just fine and you should have big number of
>>> iops. Btw, I recommend to use MariaDB instead of regular MySQL (
>>> mariadb.org) it's very fast and reliable, for InnoDB it uses modified
>>> XtraDB engine which has some tweaks.
>>>
>>> did you check mysqladmin status to indicate number of queries processed
>>> per second?
>>>
>>>
 The Load on the MysqlDB-Master averages around 0.4 with max of 0.6
 (single spike). Memory usage hangs around 24GB. I will need to check the
 process list to double check, but we generally don’t see much strain here
 either, but I stand to be corrected.

>>> DB optimasations as follows:

 key_buffer   = 16M
 max_allowed_packet   = 16M

>>>
>>> maybe increase a bit max_allowed_packet to 64mb
>>>
>>> innodb_buffer_pool_size = 12G

>>>
>>> this is fine
>>>
>>> query_cache_limit   = 20M
 query_cache_size = 128M

>>>
>>> query_cache 

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[spameden]

2015-12-09 12:43 GMT+03:00 Grant Saicom :

> We process the sent_sms into another table on they fly. Maximum size the
> sent_sms table gets is maybe 40k tops but mostly it averages around 10K. We
> see this once 1 week maybe.
>
> I have really made every attempt to remove any bottlenecks in terms
> unwieldy database sizes to allow kannel to work in a favourable environment.
>
> Is there reason to add multiple sqlboxes to feed bearer box?
>
> Is there maybe a concurrency setting I can do for bearer box to receive
> the messages? I did not come across documentation aside from email posts
> with respect to the limit-per-cycle setting.
>
> I have another question, would we be able to get faster performance if we
> went flat file for the kannel operations?
>

Well you can exclude bottlenecks by simply testing same setup with fakesmsc
daemon and see if speed will be better.

It might be that delay is caused by your SMSC uplinks overall speed and not
database.

You can also try classic smsbox implementation for sending instead of
sqlbox. But I think sqlbox is fastest and more convinient way because of DB
storage.




>
> Regards
>
>
> On 08 Dec 2015, at 15:12, spameden  wrote:
>
>
>
> 2015-12-08 12:51 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg :
>
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> We manage how big send_sms gets. The queue builder puts in 500 messages
>> at a time to a total maximum of 3000 from a larger main queue which can go
>> as big as 2M.
>>
>
> 2M is kinda big table, how big is sent_sms? 10-30M ?
>
> I think your issue happens when kannel tries to move from send_sms to
> sent_sms table already submitted message this is where it hangs. You can
> try testing it yourself with simple query:
>
> INSERT INTO sent_sms SELECT * from send_sms where sql_id= and measure
> time per query.
>
> if it's instant there should be no problem.
>
> Generally it's better to leave sent_sms table at around 1M records not
> more, old records you can move to other table daily.
>
>
>>
>> Actual hardware is a VCenter on blades with plenty ram, cpu and hp
>> 3PAR(144GB raid card ram for caching in total) fibre attached storage with
>> dedicated SSD specifically for DB. Calculated IOPS are stupidly good.
>>
>> The VMs are as follows:
>> Queuebuilder: 4 vcpu, 16Gb on SAS
>> Kannel: 4 vcpu, 8GB on SAS
>> MysqlDB-Master: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD
>> MysqlDB-Slave: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD
>>
>
> MySQL on SSDs should work just fine and you should have big number of
> iops. Btw, I recommend to use MariaDB instead of regular MySQL (
> mariadb.org) it's very fast and reliable, for InnoDB it uses modified
> XtraDB engine which has some tweaks.
>
> did you check mysqladmin status to indicate number of queries processed
> per second?
>
>
>> The Load on the MysqlDB-Master averages around 0.4 with max of 0.6
>> (single spike). Memory usage hangs around 24GB. I will need to check the
>> process list to double check, but we generally don’t see much strain here
>> either, but I stand to be corrected.
>>
> DB optimasations as follows:
>>
>> key_buffer   = 16M
>> max_allowed_packet   = 16M
>>
>
> maybe increase a bit max_allowed_packet to 64mb
>
> innodb_buffer_pool_size = 12G
>>
>
> this is fine
>
> query_cache_limit   = 20M
>> query_cache_size = 128M
>>
>
> query_cache in kannel's case doesn't affect much, so it's ok to have it
> like that.
>
>
>>
>> No extra indexes on the send_sms as we limit its size to 3000.
>>
>
> make sure both send_sms and sent_sms tables are InnoDB type.
>
>
>>
>> All reporting is done on the slaveDB, so no extra strain on monitoring
>> and reporting.
>>
>
> under 'reporting' do you mean your dlr_url is called to external script
> which is connected to slaveDB?
>
>
>>
>> Historically, we have queued at the SMPP connector and not at the smsbox.
>> We generally reached a top (AVG) speed of 73 msg/s but when I see the
>> smsbox queued figure rise and the internal smpp queue drop to 0, we only
>> hit half of this speed.
>>
>> I did not see the limit-per-cycle setting in the sqlbox documentation
>> (2011). I also checked the code and saw that the select limit was a
>> variable instead of hard-limited.
>>
>
> Yeah, it was introduced some time ago alongside with other optimisations
> (year ago or so, can't remember now), I think it should be in new
> documentation. However, you need to build documentation to get more recent
> version of it.
>
>
>> Regards
>> G
>>
>> On 08 Dec 2015, at 10:52, spameden  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Grant Vorenberg
>>
>> Technical Manager
>> Office  0861 SAICOM (724 266) Direct  010 140 5012 Support  010 140 5050
>> Cell  - Fax  010 140 5001 Email  gr...@saicomvoice.co.za Visit our
>> website  www.saicomvoice.co.za
>>
>>  
>>
>> 2015-12-08 11:23 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg :
>>
>>> 
>>> 

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[Grant Saicom]

We process the sent_sms into another table on they fly. Maximum size the 
sent_sms table gets is maybe 40k tops but mostly it averages around 10K. We see 
this once 1 week maybe.

I have really made every attempt to remove any bottlenecks in terms unwieldy 
database sizes to allow kannel to work in a favourable environment.

Is there reason to add multiple sqlboxes to feed bearer box?

Is there maybe a concurrency setting I can do for bearer box to receive the 
messages? I did not come across documentation aside from email posts with 
respect to the limit-per-cycle setting.

I have another question, would we be able to get faster performance if we went 
flat file for the kannel operations?

Regards


> On 08 Dec 2015, at 15:12, spameden  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 2015-12-08 12:51 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg  >:
>  
> 
> Hi
> 
> We manage how big send_sms gets. The queue builder puts in 500 messages at a 
> time to a total maximum of 3000 from a larger main queue which can go as big 
> as 2M.
> 
> 2M is kinda big table, how big is sent_sms? 10-30M ?
> 
> I think your issue happens when kannel tries to move from send_sms to 
> sent_sms table already submitted message this is where it hangs. You can try 
> testing it yourself with simple query:
> 
> INSERT INTO sent_sms SELECT * from send_sms where sql_id= and measure 
> time per query.
> 
> if it's instant there should be no problem.
> 
> Generally it's better to leave sent_sms table at around 1M records not more, 
> old records you can move to other table daily.
>  
> 
> Actual hardware is a VCenter on blades with plenty ram, cpu and hp 3PAR(144GB 
> raid card ram for caching in total) fibre attached storage with dedicated SSD 
> specifically for DB. Calculated IOPS are stupidly good.
> 
> The VMs are as follows:
> Queuebuilder: 4 vcpu, 16Gb on SAS
> Kannel: 4 vcpu, 8GB on SAS
> MysqlDB-Master: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD
> MysqlDB-Slave: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD
> 
> MySQL on SSDs should work just fine and you should have big number of iops. 
> Btw, I recommend to use MariaDB instead of regular MySQL (mariadb.org 
> ) it's very fast and reliable, for InnoDB it uses 
> modified XtraDB engine which has some tweaks.
> 
> did you check mysqladmin status to indicate number of queries processed per 
> second?
> 
> 
> The Load on the MysqlDB-Master averages around 0.4 with max of 0.6 (single 
> spike). Memory usage hangs around 24GB. I will need to check the process list 
> to double check, but we generally don’t see much strain here either, but I 
> stand to be corrected. 
> DB optimasations as follows:
> 
> key_buffer  
> = 16M
> max_allowed_packet  
> = 16M
> 
> maybe increase a bit max_allowed_packet to 64mb
> 
> innodb_buffer_pool_size 
> = 12G
>  
> this is fine
> 
> query_cache_limit   
> = 20M
> query_cache_size
> = 128M
> 
> query_cache in kannel's case doesn't affect much, so it's ok to have it like 
> that.
>  
> 
> No extra indexes on the send_sms as we limit its size to 3000.
> 
> make sure both send_sms and sent_sms tables are InnoDB type.
>  
> 
> All reporting is done on the slaveDB, so no extra strain on monitoring and 
> reporting.
> 
> under 'reporting' do you mean your dlr_url is called to external script which 
> is connected to slaveDB?
>  
> 
> Historically, we have queued at the SMPP connector and not at the smsbox. We 
> generally reached a top (AVG) speed of 73 msg/s but when I see the smsbox 
> queued figure rise and the internal smpp queue drop to 0, we only hit half of 
> this speed.
> 
> I did not see the limit-per-cycle setting in the sqlbox documentation (2011). 
> I also checked the code and saw that the select limit was a variable instead 
> of hard-limited.
> 
> Yeah, it was introduced some time ago alongside with other optimisations 
> (year ago or so, can't remember now), I think it should be in new 
> documentation. However, you need to build documentation to get more recent 
> version of it.
> 
> 
> Regards
> G
> 
>> On 08 Dec 2015, at 10:52, spameden > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Grant Vorenberg
>> Technical Manager
>> Office   0861 SAICOM (724 266)
>> Direct   010 140 5012
>> Support  010 140 5050
>> Cell -
>> Fax  010 140 5001
>> Emailgr...@saicomvoice.co.za 
>> Visit our websitewww.saicomvoice.co.za 
>> 
>>   
>> 
>> 2015-12-08 11:23 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg > >:
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> Here is my config:
>> 
>> group = sqlbox
>> id = sqlbox-db
>> smsbox-id = sqlbox
>> #global-sender = ""
>> bearerbox-host = localhost
>> bearerbox-port = 13001
>> smsbox-port = 13005
>> smsbox-port-ssl = 

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[Grant Saicom]

Hi

I don’t see any real improvement in performance.

I am trying some different values.

Just an aside: It almost seems to me that the bottleneck is sqlbox’s submission 
to bearerbox and not the quantity sqlbox pops out of send_sms to hand over. I 
am going to go over the sqlbox config doc again, but are there any other 
optimisation settings I should focus on?

Kind
Grant
> On 07 Dec 2015, at 15:06, spameden  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 2015-12-07 14:03 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg  >:
>  
> 
> Hi Guys
> 
> I am a new to the list subscription and am looking for a little clarity on 
> the SQLBOX.
> 
> I have a Debian Wheezy box running:
> Kannel sqlbox version 1.4.4
> Libxml version 2.7.2
> MySQL 5.5.43
> 
> The front end is custom and drops message into the send_sms table. These 
> messages are terminated via smpp to another system of ours. We process and 
> clean out the sent_sms table.
> 
> I gather stats on the performance of the system using the status page: 
> http://localhost:13000/status 
> 
> I am trying to understand the following output from the screen:
> Box connections:
>smsbox:sqlbox, IP 127.0.0.1 (2532 queued), (on-line 0d 2h 48m 19s)
> 
> This means there is a queue on sqlbox. 
> 
> Queue works like this:
> 
> First sqlbox gets messages from DB backend, then it adds messages to own 
> queue, then it sends message into bearerbox queue and bearerbox splits this 
> queue over your connected SMSC/upstream operators. 
> 
> So if there is a huge queue on sqlbox it means there is a big amount of MTs 
> in your send_sms table and sqlbox is still submitting those to bearerbox.
> 
> To optimize sqlbox I'd recommend adding this parameter into sqlbox section 
> (after group = sqlbox):
> limit-per-cycle = 50 this means sqlbox will get 50 bulk messages from DB per 
> query at once instead of 1.
> 
>  
> 
> What I noticed is when our send speeds start dipping on the smpp connection 
> (internal/default route), this smsbox:sql queue starts building up.
> 
> When the smsbox:sqlbox queue starts building up like this:
> 1)What causes this?
> 2) What does this signify?
> 
> We generally don’t see this behaviour very often, but its effect is 
> detrimental to the performance of the system so I would like to know what 
> causes the growth and how to combat it so our send speed is safe-guarded.
> 
> 
> Here is an excerpt from my config files:
> 
> :
> group = sqlbox
> id = sqlbox-db
> smsbox-id = sqlbox
> #global-sender = ""
> bearerbox-host = localhost
> bearerbox-port = 13001
> smsbox-port = 13005
> smsbox-port-ssl = false
> sql-log-table = sent_sms
> sql-insert-table = send_sms
> 
> 
> :
> group = smsbox
> bearerbox-host = 127.0.0.1
> sendsms-port = 13013
> global-sender = 13013
> smsbox-id=my_smsbox
> 
> group=smsbox-route
> smsbox-id=sqlbox
> smsc-id=internal
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grant Vorenberg
> Technical Manager
> Office0861 SAICOM (724 266)
> Direct010 140 5012
> Support   010 140 5050
> Cell  -
> Fax   010 140 5001
> Email gr...@saicomvoice.co.za 
> Visit our website www.saicomvoice.co.za 
> 
>  

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[spameden]

2015-12-08 11:23 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg :

> [image: Saicom-now-offers-Cloud-PBX]
> 
> Here is my config:
>
> group = sqlbox
> id = sqlbox-db
> smsbox-id = sqlbox
> #global-sender = ""
> bearerbox-host = localhost
> bearerbox-port = 13001
> smsbox-port = 13005
> smsbox-port-ssl = false
> sql-log-table = sent_sms
> sql-insert-table = send_sms
> log-file = "/var/log/kannel/kannel-sqlbox.log"
> log-level = 0
> #sqlbox optimisation GAV 20151207
> limit-per-cycle = 100
>


Try monitoring your database workload.

Is send_sms table is big?


>
> On 07 Dec 2015, at 15:06, spameden  wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Grant Vorenberg
>
> Technical Manager
> Office  0861 SAICOM (724 266) Direct  010 140 5012 Support  010 140 5050
> Cell  - Fax  010 140 5001 Email  gr...@saicomvoice.co.za Visit our website
> www.saicomvoice.co.za
>
> [image: logo image] 
>
> 2015-12-07 14:03 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg :
>
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Hi Guys
>>
>> I am a new to the list subscription and am looking for a little clarity
>> on the SQLBOX.
>>
>> I have a Debian Wheezy box running:
>> Kannel sqlbox version 1.4.4
>> Libxml version 2.7.2
>> MySQL 5.5.43
>>
>> The front end is custom and drops message into the send_sms table. These
>> messages are terminated via smpp to another system of ours. We process and
>> clean out the sent_sms table.
>>
>> I gather stats on the performance of the system using the status page:
>> http://localhost:13000/status
>>
>> I am trying to understand the following output from the screen:
>> Box connections:
>>smsbox:sqlbox, IP 127.0.0.1 (2532 queued), (on-line 0d 2h 48m 19s)
>>
>
> This means there is a queue on sqlbox.
>
> Queue works like this:
>
> First sqlbox gets messages from DB backend, then it adds messages to own
> queue, then it sends message into bearerbox queue and bearerbox splits this
> queue over your connected SMSC/upstream operators.
>
> So if there is a huge queue on sqlbox it means there is a big amount of
> MTs in your send_sms table and sqlbox is still submitting those to
> bearerbox.
>
> To optimize sqlbox I'd recommend adding this parameter into sqlbox section
> (after group = sqlbox):
> limit-per-cycle = 50 this means sqlbox will get 50 bulk messages from DB
> per query at once instead of 1.
>
>
>
>>
>> What I noticed is when our send speeds start dipping on the smpp
>> connection (internal/default route), this smsbox:sql queue starts building
>> up.
>>
>> When the smsbox:sqlbox queue starts building up like this:
>> 1)What causes this?
>> 2) What does this signify?
>>
>> We generally don’t see this behaviour very often, but its effect is
>> detrimental to the performance of the system so I would like to know what
>> causes the growth and how to combat it so our send speed is safe-guarded.
>>
>>
>> Here is an excerpt from my config files:
>>
>> :
>> group = sqlbox
>> id = sqlbox-db
>> smsbox-id = sqlbox
>> #global-sender = ""
>> bearerbox-host = localhost
>> bearerbox-port = 13001
>> smsbox-port = 13005
>> smsbox-port-ssl = false
>> sql-log-table = sent_sms
>> sql-insert-table = send_sms
>>
>>
>> :
>> group = smsbox
>> bearerbox-host = 127.0.0.1
>> sendsms-port = 13013
>> global-sender = 13013
>> smsbox-id=my_smsbox
>>
>> group=smsbox-route
>> smsbox-id=sqlbox
>> smsc-id=internal
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Grant Vorenberg
>>
>> Technical Manager
>> Office   0861 SAICOM (724 266) Direct   010 140 5012 Support   010 140
>> 5050 Cell   - Fax   010 140 5001 Email   gr...@saicomvoice.co.za Visit
>> our website   www.saicomvoice.co.za
>>
>>  
>>
>
>

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[spameden]

2015-12-08 12:51 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg :

> [image: Saicom-Voice-Services]
> 
> Hi
>
> We manage how big send_sms gets. The queue builder puts in 500 messages at
> a time to a total maximum of 3000 from a larger main queue which can go as
> big as 2M.
>

2M is kinda big table, how big is sent_sms? 10-30M ?

I think your issue happens when kannel tries to move from send_sms to
sent_sms table already submitted message this is where it hangs. You can
try testing it yourself with simple query:

INSERT INTO sent_sms SELECT * from send_sms where sql_id= and measure
time per query.

if it's instant there should be no problem.

Generally it's better to leave sent_sms table at around 1M records not
more, old records you can move to other table daily.


>
> Actual hardware is a VCenter on blades with plenty ram, cpu and hp
> 3PAR(144GB raid card ram for caching in total) fibre attached storage with
> dedicated SSD specifically for DB. Calculated IOPS are stupidly good.
>
> The VMs are as follows:
> Queuebuilder: 4 vcpu, 16Gb on SAS
> Kannel: 4 vcpu, 8GB on SAS
> MysqlDB-Master: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD
> MysqlDB-Slave: 8 vcpu, 32GB on SSD
>

MySQL on SSDs should work just fine and you should have big number of iops.
Btw, I recommend to use MariaDB instead of regular MySQL (mariadb.org) it's
very fast and reliable, for InnoDB it uses modified XtraDB engine which has
some tweaks.

did you check mysqladmin status to indicate number of queries processed per
second?


> The Load on the MysqlDB-Master averages around 0.4 with max of 0.6 (single
> spike). Memory usage hangs around 24GB. I will need to check the process
> list to double check, but we generally don’t see much strain here either,
> but I stand to be corrected.
>
DB optimasations as follows:
>
> key_buffer   = 16M
> max_allowed_packet   = 16M
>

maybe increase a bit max_allowed_packet to 64mb

innodb_buffer_pool_size = 12G
>

this is fine

query_cache_limit   = 20M
> query_cache_size = 128M
>

query_cache in kannel's case doesn't affect much, so it's ok to have it
like that.


>
> No extra indexes on the send_sms as we limit its size to 3000.
>

make sure both send_sms and sent_sms tables are InnoDB type.


>
> All reporting is done on the slaveDB, so no extra strain on monitoring and
> reporting.
>

under 'reporting' do you mean your dlr_url is called to external script
which is connected to slaveDB?


>
> Historically, we have queued at the SMPP connector and not at the smsbox.
> We generally reached a top (AVG) speed of 73 msg/s but when I see the
> smsbox queued figure rise and the internal smpp queue drop to 0, we only
> hit half of this speed.
>
> I did not see the limit-per-cycle setting in the sqlbox documentation
> (2011). I also checked the code and saw that the select limit was a
> variable instead of hard-limited.
>

Yeah, it was introduced some time ago alongside with other optimisations
(year ago or so, can't remember now), I think it should be in new
documentation. However, you need to build documentation to get more recent
version of it.


> Regards
> G
>
> On 08 Dec 2015, at 10:52, spameden  wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Grant Vorenberg
>
> Technical Manager
> Office  0861 SAICOM (724 266) Direct  010 140 5012 Support  010 140 5050
> Cell  - Fax  010 140 5001 Email  gr...@saicomvoice.co.za Visit our website
> www.saicomvoice.co.za
>
> [image: logo image] 
>
> 2015-12-08 11:23 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg :
>
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Here is my config:
>>
>> group = sqlbox
>> id = sqlbox-db
>> smsbox-id = sqlbox
>> #global-sender = ""
>> bearerbox-host = localhost
>> bearerbox-port = 13001
>> smsbox-port = 13005
>> smsbox-port-ssl = false
>> sql-log-table = sent_sms
>> sql-insert-table = send_sms
>> log-file = "/var/log/kannel/kannel-sqlbox.log"
>> log-level = 0
>> #sqlbox optimisation GAV 20151207
>> limit-per-cycle = 100
>>
>
>
> Try monitoring your database workload.
>
> Is send_sms table is big?
>
>
>>
>> On 07 Dec 2015, at 15:06, spameden  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Grant Vorenberg
>>
>> Technical Manager
>> Office   0861 SAICOM (724 266) Direct   010 140 5012 Support   010 140
>> 5050 Cell   - Fax   010 140 5001 Email   gr...@saicomvoice.co.za Visit
>> our website   www.saicomvoice.co.za
>>
>>  
>>
>> 2015-12-07 14:03 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg :
>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> Hi Guys
>>>
>>> I am a new to the list subscription and am looking for a little clarity
>>> on the SQLBOX.
>>>
>>> I have a Debian Wheezy box running:
>>> Kannel sqlbox version 1.4.4
>>> Libxml version 2.7.2
>>> MySQL 5.5.43
>>>
>>> The front end is custom and drops message into the send_sms table. These
>>> messages are terminated via smpp to another 

SQLBOX queued messages question

[Grant Vorenberg]

Saicom now offers Cloud PBX

Hi Guys

I am a new to the list subscription and am looking for a little clarity on the 
SQLBOX.

I have a Debian Wheezy box running:
Kannel sqlbox version 1.4.4
Libxml version 2.7.2
MySQL 5.5.43

The front end is custom and drops message into the send_sms table. These 
messages are terminated via smpp to another system of ours. We process and 
clean out the sent_sms table.

I gather stats on the performance of the system using the status page: 
http://localhost:13000/status

I am trying to understand the following output from the screen:
Box connections:
   smsbox:sqlbox, IP 127.0.0.1 (2532 queued), (on-line 0d 2h 48m 19s)

What I noticed is when our send speeds start dipping on the smpp connection 
(internal/default route), this smsbox:sql queue starts building up.

When the smsbox:sqlbox queue starts building up like this:
1)What causes this?
2) What does this signify?

We generally don’t see this behaviour very often, but its effect is detrimental 
to the performance of the system so I would like to know what causes the growth 
and how to combat it so our send speed is safe-guarded.


Here is an excerpt from my config files:

:
group = sqlbox
id = sqlbox-db
smsbox-id = sqlbox
#global-sender = ""
bearerbox-host = localhost
bearerbox-port = 13001
smsbox-port = 13005
smsbox-port-ssl = false
sql-log-table = sent_sms
sql-insert-table = send_sms


:
group = smsbox
bearerbox-host = 127.0.0.1
sendsms-port = 13013
global-sender = 13013
smsbox-id=my_smsbox

group=smsbox-route
smsbox-id=sqlbox
smsc-id=internal


Regards

-- 
Office: 0861 SAICOM (724 266)
Direct: 010 140 5012
Support: 010 140 5050
Fax: 010 140 5001
Email: gr...@saicomvoice.co.za
Visit our website: www.saicomvoice.co.za

Re: SQLBOX queued messages question

[spameden]

2015-12-07 14:03 GMT+03:00 Grant Vorenberg :

> [image: Saicom-now-offers-Cloud-PBX]
> 
> Hi Guys
>
> I am a new to the list subscription and am looking for a little clarity on
> the SQLBOX.
>
> I have a Debian Wheezy box running:
> Kannel sqlbox version 1.4.4
> Libxml version 2.7.2
> MySQL 5.5.43
>
> The front end is custom and drops message into the send_sms table. These
> messages are terminated via smpp to another system of ours. We process and
> clean out the sent_sms table.
>
> I gather stats on the performance of the system using the status page:
> http://localhost:13000/status
>
> I am trying to understand the following output from the screen:
> Box connections:
>smsbox:sqlbox, IP 127.0.0.1 (2532 queued), (on-line 0d 2h 48m 19s)
>

This means there is a queue on sqlbox.

Queue works like this:

First sqlbox gets messages from DB backend, then it adds messages to own
queue, then it sends message into bearerbox queue and bearerbox splits this
queue over your connected SMSC/upstream operators.

So if there is a huge queue on sqlbox it means there is a big amount of MTs
in your send_sms table and sqlbox is still submitting those to bearerbox.

To optimize sqlbox I'd recommend adding this parameter into sqlbox section
(after group = sqlbox):
limit-per-cycle = 50 this means sqlbox will get 50 bulk messages from DB
per query at once instead of 1.



>
> What I noticed is when our send speeds start dipping on the smpp
> connection (internal/default route), this smsbox:sql queue starts building
> up.
>
> When the smsbox:sqlbox queue starts building up like this:
> 1)What causes this?
> 2) What does this signify?
>
> We generally don’t see this behaviour very often, but its effect is
> detrimental to the performance of the system so I would like to know what
> causes the growth and how to combat it so our send speed is safe-guarded.
>
>
> Here is an excerpt from my config files:
>
> :
> group = sqlbox
> id = sqlbox-db
> smsbox-id = sqlbox
> #global-sender = ""
> bearerbox-host = localhost
> bearerbox-port = 13001
> smsbox-port = 13005
> smsbox-port-ssl = false
> sql-log-table = sent_sms
> sql-insert-table = send_sms
>
>
> :
> group = smsbox
> bearerbox-host = 127.0.0.1
> sendsms-port = 13013
> global-sender = 13013
> smsbox-id=my_smsbox
>
> group=smsbox-route
> smsbox-id=sqlbox
> smsc-id=internal
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>
> Grant Vorenberg
>
> Technical Manager
> Office  0861 SAICOM (724 266) Direct  010 140 5012 Support  010 140 5050
> Cell  - Fax  010 140 5001 Email  gr...@saicomvoice.co.za Visit our website
> www.saicomvoice.co.za
>
> [image: logo image] 
>
>

SMSC HTTP inconsistent status for queued messages

[Radu Gasler]

Hello,

I am using Kannel status page to monitor the throughput and the size of 
the queues for a large-scale deployment of Kannel with multiple SMSC types.


However, I noticed an inconsistency in the way the queued messages 
status for SMSC HTTP behaves compared with the other SMSC types.


For the rest of SMSC types, the queued messages status shows the number 
of messages currently in the SMSC outgoing queue. Here is a status 
example for SMPP:


*MySMSC*[mysmpp]SMPP:10.1.1.144:5019/5019:SMPPGW1:SMSC (online 
39583s, rcvd: sms 69288 (0.23,0.23,0.17) / dlr 19265264 
(55.94,58.73,42.15), sent: sms 2233924 (14.04,12.43,5.61) / dlr 0 
(0.00,0.00,0.00), failed 0, queued 3 msgs)


The related code from smsc_smpp.c is:

static long queued_cb(SMSCConn *conn)
{
SMPP *smpp;

smpp = conn-data;
conn-load = (smpp ? (conn-status != SMSCCONN_DEAD ?
  gw_prioqueue_len(smpp-msgs_to_send) : 0) : 0);
return conn-load;
}

However, for SMSC HTTP, the queued messages status shows the number of 
open/unacked sends (smsc_http.c):


static long httpsmsc_queued(SMSCConn *conn)
{
ConnData *conndata = conn-data;

return (conndata ? (conn-status != SMSCCONN_DEAD ?
counter_value(conndata-open_sends) : 0) : 0);
}

This makes it impossible to monitor and reason about the real size of 
the queue for a HTTP SMSC.


I wonder whether this is the intended/desired behavior. And if not, 
whether the above code could be changed to work like for the other SMSCs:


return (conndata ? (conn-status != SMSCCONN_DEAD ?
gwlist_len(conndata-msg_to_send) : 0) : 0);

Thank you,
Radu Gasler

Re: release queued messages one by one

[Moazzam Ali]

anybody, please help

//moazzam

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:40 AM, Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com wrote:

 is it possible to define delay interval between the queued messages?  For
 example if there are 100 SMS queued then after every second one SMS should
 be submitted to SMSC?

 //moazzam

Re: release queued messages one by one

[Willy Mularto]

Set the throughput
On Jun 21, 2012 2:42 AM, Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com wrote:

 is it possible to define delay interval between the queued messages?  For
 example if there are 100 SMS queued then after every second one SMS should
 be submitted to SMSC?

 //moazzam

Re: release queued messages one by one

[Moazzam Ali]

throughout controls the overall bind capacity not something to control the
delay between the queued messages

//moazzam

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.com wrote:

 Set the throughput
 On Jun 21, 2012 2:42 AM, Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com wrote:

 is it possible to define delay interval between the queued messages?  For
 example if there are 100 SMS queued then after every second one SMS should
 be submitted to SMSC?

 //moazzam

Re: release queued messages one by one

[spameden]

What do you mean under 'delay'?

Well, you can insert the messages into send_sms with a delay inside your
program, i.e (on bash):

for i in $(seq 1 10); do mysql -e INSERT INTO send_sms set receiver=... ;
sleep 1; done

2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com

 throughout controls the overall bind capacity not something to control the
 delay between the queued messages

 //moazzam

 On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.comwrote:

 Set the throughput
 On Jun 21, 2012 2:42 AM, Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com wrote:

 is it possible to define delay interval between the queued messages?
  For example if there are 100 SMS queued then after every second one SMS
 should be submitted to SMSC?

 //moazzam

Re: release queued messages one by one

[Moazzam Ali]

out smsapp is already doing this we submit each message to kannel with 3 
sec delay from the smsapp but sometime it happen that due to 
connectivity issue or due to some reason like throttling error, kannel 
can not submit messages so it starts queues all the messages and when 
the link become alive it tries to submit all of the queued messages at 
once or in single burst so lets say you have 200 SMS already in our 
queue and the total throughput of  the link is 50 then again we will hit 
with the throttling error. Therefore, I am looking for a solution how to 
create delay between the queued messages so kannel process the queued 
messages in effective way without hitting the throughput limit.



On 06/24/2012 8:10 PM, spameden wrote:

What do you mean under 'delay'?

Well, you can insert the messages into send_sms with a delay inside 
your program, i.e (on bash):


for i in $(seq 1 10); do mysql -e INSERT INTO send_sms set 
receiver=... ; sleep 1; done


2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com mailto:moz...@gmail.com

throughout controls the overall bind capacity not something to
control the delay between the queued messages

//moazzam

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Willy Mularto
sangpr...@gmail.com mailto:sangpr...@gmail.com wrote:

Set the throughput

On Jun 21, 2012 2:42 AM, Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com
mailto:moz...@gmail.com wrote:

is it possible to define delay interval between the queued
messages?  For example if there are 100 SMS queued then
after every second one SMS should be submitted to SMSC?

//moazzam

Re: release queued messages one by one

[spameden]

did you specify throughput = 1 in your smsc config?

2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com

  out smsapp is already doing this we submit each message to kannel with 3
 sec delay from the smsapp but sometime it happen that due to connectivity
 issue or due to some reason like throttling error, kannel can not submit
 messages so it starts queues all the messages and when the link become
 alive it tries to submit all of the queued messages at once or in single
 burst so lets say you have 200 SMS already in our queue and the total
 throughput of  the link is 50 then again we will hit with the throttling
 error. Therefore, I am looking for a solution how to create delay between
 the queued messages so kannel process the queued messages in effective way
 without hitting the throughput limit.


 On 06/24/2012 8:10 PM, spameden wrote:

 What do you mean under 'delay'?

 Well, you can insert the messages into send_sms with a delay inside your
 program, i.e (on bash):

 for i in $(seq 1 10); do mysql -e INSERT INTO send_sms set receiver=...
 ; sleep 1; done

 2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com

 throughout controls the overall bind capacity not something to control
 the delay between the queued messages

 //moazzam

 On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.comwrote:

 Set the throughput
  On Jun 21, 2012 2:42 AM, Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com wrote:

 is it possible to define delay interval between the queued messages?
  For example if there are 100 SMS queued then after every second one SMS
 should be submitted to SMSC?

 //moazzam

Re: release queued messages one by one

[Moazzam Ali]

this is not desired because my bind limit is 50, actually however some 
countries like US/Canada there's a limitation of 1sms/sec/number 
(sender) so i am trying to find out how to handle this on kannel level.



On 06/24/2012 10:25 PM, spameden wrote:

did you specify throughput = 1 in your smsc config?

2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com mailto:moz...@gmail.com

out smsapp is already doing this we submit each message to kannel
with 3 sec delay from the smsapp but sometime it happen that due
to connectivity issue or due to some reason like throttling error,
kannel can not submit messages so it starts queues all the
messages and when the link become alive it tries to submit all of
the queued messages at once or in single burst so lets say you
have 200 SMS already in our queue and the total throughput of the
link is 50 then again we will hit with the throttling error.
Therefore, I am looking for a solution how to create delay between
the queued messages so kannel process the queued messages in
effective way without hitting the throughput limit.


On 06/24/2012 8:10 PM, spameden wrote:

What do you mean under 'delay'?

Well, you can insert the messages into send_sms with a delay
inside your program, i.e (on bash):

for i in $(seq 1 10); do mysql -e INSERT INTO send_sms set
receiver=... ; sleep 1; done

2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com mailto:moz...@gmail.com

throughout controls the overall bind capacity not something
to control the delay between the queued messages

//moazzam

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Willy Mularto
sangpr...@gmail.com mailto:sangpr...@gmail.com wrote:

Set the throughput

On Jun 21, 2012 2:42 AM, Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com
mailto:moz...@gmail.com wrote:

is it possible to define delay interval between the
queued messages?  For example if there are 100 SMS
queued then after every second one SMS should be
submitted to SMSC?

//moazzam

Re: release queued messages one by one

[spameden]

It might be either kannel bug or SMSC itself, you can try limiting
throughput to 1 and testing it out.

don't think there is a limit for number/sec, you should handle this limit
at your application level before you inserting message into kannel's queue

2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com

  this is not desired because my bind limit is 50, actually however some
 countries like US/Canada there's a limitation of 1sms/sec/number (sender)
 so i am trying to find out how to handle this on kannel level.


 On 06/24/2012 10:25 PM, spameden wrote:

 did you specify throughput = 1 in your smsc config?

 2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com

  out smsapp is already doing this we submit each message to kannel with
 3 sec delay from the smsapp but sometime it happen that due to connectivity
 issue or due to some reason like throttling error, kannel can not submit
 messages so it starts queues all the messages and when the link become
 alive it tries to submit all of the queued messages at once or in single
 burst so lets say you have 200 SMS already in our queue and the total
 throughput of  the link is 50 then again we will hit with the throttling
 error. Therefore, I am looking for a solution how to create delay between
 the queued messages so kannel process the queued messages in effective way
 without hitting the throughput limit.


 On 06/24/2012 8:10 PM, spameden wrote:

 What do you mean under 'delay'?

 Well, you can insert the messages into send_sms with a delay inside your
 program, i.e (on bash):

 for i in $(seq 1 10); do mysql -e INSERT INTO send_sms set receiver=...
 ; sleep 1; done

 2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com

 throughout controls the overall bind capacity not something to control
 the delay between the queued messages

 //moazzam

 On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Willy Mularto sangpr...@gmail.comwrote:

 Set the throughput
  On Jun 21, 2012 2:42 AM, Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com wrote:

 is it possible to define delay interval between the queued messages?
  For example if there are 100 SMS queued then after every second one SMS
 should be submitted to SMSC?

 //moazzam

Re: release queued messages one by one

[Moazzam Ali]

Setting throughout to 1 is out of question.  OK, i found that this is 
due to the concatenation. if we keep this disabled then no throttling 
error appear and if we enable it, we get this error when message length 
is more than 160.  maybe we need to add some delay in each chunk of a 
mupli-part message on application level



On 06/24/2012 11:32 PM, spameden wrote:
It might be either kannel bug or SMSC itself, you can try limiting 
throughput to 1 and testing it out.


don't think there is a limit for number/sec, you should handle this 
limit at your application level before you inserting message into 
kannel's queue


2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com mailto:moz...@gmail.com

this is not desired because my bind limit is 50, actually however
some countries like US/Canada there's a limitation of
1sms/sec/number (sender) so i am trying to find out how to handle
this on kannel level.


On 06/24/2012 10:25 PM, spameden wrote:

did you specify throughput = 1 in your smsc config?

2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com mailto:moz...@gmail.com

out smsapp is already doing this we submit each message to
kannel with 3 sec delay from the smsapp but sometime it
happen that due to connectivity issue or due to some reason
like throttling error, kannel can not submit messages so it
starts queues all the messages and when the link become alive
it tries to submit all of the queued messages at once or in
single burst so lets say you have 200 SMS already in our
queue and the total throughput of  the link is 50 then again
we will hit with the throttling error. Therefore, I am
looking for a solution how to create delay between the queued
messages so kannel process the queued messages in effective
way without hitting the throughput limit.


On 06/24/2012 8:10 PM, spameden wrote:

What do you mean under 'delay'?

Well, you can insert the messages into send_sms with a delay
inside your program, i.e (on bash):

for i in $(seq 1 10); do mysql -e INSERT INTO send_sms set
receiver=... ; sleep 1; done

2012/6/24 Moazzam Ali moz...@gmail.com
mailto:moz...@gmail.com

throughout controls the overall bind capacity not
something to control the delay between the queued messages

//moazzam

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Willy Mularto
sangpr...@gmail.com mailto:sangpr...@gmail.com wrote:

Set the throughput

On Jun 21, 2012 2:42 AM, Moazzam Ali
moz...@gmail.com mailto:moz...@gmail.com wrote:

is it possible to define delay interval between
the queued messages?  For example if there are
100 SMS queued then after every second one SMS
should be submitted to SMSC?

//moazzam

release queued messages one by one

[Moazzam Ali]

is it possible to define delay interval between the queued messages?  
For example if there are 100 SMS queued then after every second one SMS 
should be submitted to SMSC?


//moazzam

discard queued messages

[Beatrice Tamburrino]

hi

is it true, that with the parameter: 

- sms-resend-freq
- sms-resend-retry


I can define, how long the messages should be queued on Kannel side? 


e.g.: SMSC is not reachable, 3 messages are queued on Kannel. set configuration 
sms-resend-freq = 10 and sms-resend-retry=2, so that kannel first try to send, 
but SMSC still not there, so wait 10 seconds than try again, still no response, 
than kannel deletes them from kannel.

did I understand something wrong?

thanks for any help

beatrice
-- 
GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT!
Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01

Queued Messages

[Bryan Gintz]

How can you tell if a message that got queued gets sent?  For my system, 
it seems to queue the message if kannel gets messed up, but then when I 
restart kannel, it doesn't seem to send the queued messages. 


I can't seem to find documentation on this, can anyone help?

Thanks,
Bryan

Re: Queued Messages

[Alvaro Cornejo]

use dlrs for that. If yoy track them, you can know the status of each
of your messages received by kannel.

Also you can use the status and store-status page of the bearerbox
admin interface to see queued messages

Hope helps




|-|
Envíe y Reciba Datos y mensajes de Texto (SMS) hacia y desde cualquier
celular y Nextel
en el Perú, México y en mas de 180 paises. Use aplicaciones 2 vias via
SMS y GPRS online
  Visitenos en www.perusms.NET www.smsglobal.com.mx y
www.pravcom.com



On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Bryan Gintz bgi...@coyfc.org wrote:
 How can you tell if a message that got queued gets sent?  For my system, it
 seems to queue the message if kannel gets messed up, but then when I restart
 kannel, it doesn't seem to send the queued messages.
 I can't seem to find documentation on this, can anyone help?

 Thanks,
 Bryan

Re: Queued Messages

[Nikos Balkanas]

Hi,

In addition your bearerbox access log will show all sent messages.

BR,
Nikos
- Original Message - 
From: Alvaro Cornejo cornejo.alv...@gmail.com

To: Bryan Gintz bgi...@coyfc.org
Cc: users@kannel.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 9:06 PM
Subject: Re: Queued Messages


use dlrs for that. If yoy track them, you can know the status of each
of your messages received by kannel.

Also you can use the status and store-status page of the bearerbox
admin interface to see queued messages

Hope helps




|-|
Envνe y Reciba Datos y mensajes de Texto (SMS) hacia y desde cualquier
celular y Nextel
en el Perϊ, Mιxico y en mas de 180 paises. Use aplicaciones 2 vias via
SMS y GPRS online
 Visitenos en www.perusms.NET www.smsglobal.com.mx y
www.pravcom.com



On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Bryan Gintz bgi...@coyfc.org wrote:

How can you tell if a message that got queued gets sent? For my system, it
seems to queue the message if kannel gets messed up, but then when I 
restart

kannel, it doesn't seem to send the queued messages.
I can't seem to find documentation on this, can anyone help?

Thanks,
Bryan

limit the queued messages

[Oren Ein-gal]

Hello Group,

 

I'm using Kannel 1.4.1 with EMI/UCP protocol.

 

Is there a way to limit the queued outgoing messages?

Sometimes due to network failures (I assume) the SMSC connection goes
from online to re-connecting status, and the messages are being
queued.

 

Is there a way to configure the Kannel that the sendsms http interface
will return an error in case the SMSC connection is not online.

 

Thanks,

 

Oren Ein-Gal

VP Professional Services

 

Volas Entertainment

T +972 73 252 5252 (ext. 103)

F +972 9 956 7481

M + 972 54 522 4138

www.VolasEnt.com http://www.volasent.com/ 

Unleash Your Content

 

Re: limit the queued messages

[Falko Ziemann]

Hi,

see core configuration on page 22:

sms-incoming-queue-limit

number of messages

Set maximum size of incoming
message queue. After number of
messages has hit this value,
Kannel began to discard them.
Value 0 means giving strict
priority to outgoing messages.
-1, default, means that the queue
of infinite length is accepted.
(This works with any normal
input, use this variable only
when Kannel message queues
grow very long).

Regards
Falko

2008/7/8 Oren Ein-gal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Hello Group,



 I'm using Kannel 1.4.1 with EMI/UCP protocol.



 Is there a way to limit the queued outgoing messages?

 Sometimes due to network failures (I assume) the SMSC connection goes from
 online to re-connecting status, and the messages are being queued.



 Is there a way to configure the Kannel that the sendsms http interface will
 return an error in case the SMSC connection is not online.



 Thanks,



 Oren Ein-Gal

 VP Professional Services



 Volas Entertainment

 T +972 73 252 5252 (ext. 103)

 F +972 9 956 7481

 M + 972 54 522 4138

 www.VolasEnt.com

 Unleash Your Content

RE: limit the queued messages

[Oren Ein-gal]

Hi Falko,

Thanks for the fast answer.
However I'm looking for a way to limit the outgoing messages queue.
I don't want outgoing message to be queued at all.

Thanks,

Oren Ein-Gal
VP Professional Services
 
Volas Entertainment
T +972 73 252 5252 (ext. 103)
F +972 9 956 7481
M + 972 54 522 4138
www.VolasEnt.com
Unleash Your Content


-Original Message-
From: Falko Ziemann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 7:22 PM
To: Oren Ein-gal
Cc: users@kannel.org
Subject: Re: limit the queued messages

Hi,

see core configuration on page 22:

sms-incoming-queue-limit

number of messages

Set maximum size of incoming
message queue. After number of
messages has hit this value,
Kannel began to discard them.
Value 0 means giving strict
priority to outgoing messages.
-1, default, means that the queue
of infinite length is accepted.
(This works with any normal
input, use this variable only
when Kannel message queues
grow very long).

Regards
Falko

2008/7/8 Oren Ein-gal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Hello Group,



 I'm using Kannel 1.4.1 with EMI/UCP protocol.



 Is there a way to limit the queued outgoing messages?

 Sometimes due to network failures (I assume) the SMSC connection goes from
 online to re-connecting status, and the messages are being queued.



 Is there a way to configure the Kannel that the sendsms http interface will
 return an error in case the SMSC connection is not online.



 Thanks,



 Oren Ein-Gal

 VP Professional Services



 Volas Entertainment

 T +972 73 252 5252 (ext. 103)

 F +972 9 956 7481

 M + 972 54 522 4138

 www.VolasEnt.com

 Unleash Your Content

Re: limit the queued messages

[Falko Ziemann]

Hi,

haven't tried this yet, but under incoming kannel seems to
understand the HTTP- not the EMI-Interface in this case, so this
should do it.

I took a quick look at the source and it seems like the bearerbox
checks the queue for the EMI-connection and if the queue is longer
than the value sms-incoming-queue-list the message is discarded.

Regards
Falko

2008/7/8 Oren Ein-gal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Hi Falko,

 Thanks for the fast answer.
 However I'm looking for a way to limit the outgoing messages queue.
 I don't want outgoing message to be queued at all.

 Thanks,

 Oren Ein-Gal
 VP Professional Services

 Volas Entertainment
 T +972 73 252 5252 (ext. 103)
 F +972 9 956 7481
 M + 972 54 522 4138
 www.VolasEnt.com
 Unleash Your Content


 -Original Message-
 From: Falko Ziemann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 7:22 PM
 To: Oren Ein-gal
 Cc: users@kannel.org
 Subject: Re: limit the queued messages

 Hi,

 see core configuration on page 22:

 sms-incoming-queue-limit

 number of messages

 Set maximum size of incoming
 message queue. After number of
 messages has hit this value,
 Kannel began to discard them.
 Value 0 means giving strict
 priority to outgoing messages.
 -1, default, means that the queue
 of infinite length is accepted.
 (This works with any normal
 input, use this variable only
 when Kannel message queues
 grow very long).

 Regards
 Falko

 2008/7/8 Oren Ein-gal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Hello Group,



 I'm using Kannel 1.4.1 with EMI/UCP protocol.



 Is there a way to limit the queued outgoing messages?

 Sometimes due to network failures (I assume) the SMSC connection goes from
 online to re-connecting status, and the messages are being queued.



 Is there a way to configure the Kannel that the sendsms http interface will
 return an error in case the SMSC connection is not online.



 Thanks,



 Oren Ein-Gal

 VP Professional Services



 Volas Entertainment

 T +972 73 252 5252 (ext. 103)

 F +972 9 956 7481

 M + 972 54 522 4138

 www.VolasEnt.com

 Unleash Your Content

queued messages?

[Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

What does this mean (status page)?

SMS: received 1 (50 queued), sent 0 (0 queued), store size 50

Could it be related to the smsbox_list empty warning??

also, I'm using this new config for my sms-service:

group = sms-service
keyword = default
keyword-regex = .*
~   
max-messages = 0
catch-all = true
get-url = http://somesite.com/getsms.php?phone=%pmsg=%r;

That's the only sms-service group. Any ideas why it doesn't work? I'm pretty 
sure it's related to
the smsbox_list empty warning:


2008-04-15 08:06:02 [5912] [4] WARNING: smsbox_list empty!
(repeats the same number of queued messages in store, 51)

- --
Arturo Buanzo Busleiman
Reliable inter-continental Mail Relay Service - Ask me!
Independent Security Consultant - SANS - OISSG
http://www.buanzo.com.ar/pro/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIBKj8AlpOsGhXcE0RClY6AJ9rtXtJiFdcRr0R5N6ynQi+GkMjKACfePti
5Uq1tUVVVBMqYOiyvIto018=
=FRIt
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: queued messages?

[Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Alejandro Guerrieri wrote:
| All boxes are reading the same conf files right?

all localhost.

But I just solved it.

I commented out this:

group = smsbox
#smsbox-id = SMSBox1

restarted kannel... and the queue was processed, and all get-url requests 
happened.

- --
Arturo Buanzo Busleiman
Reliable inter-continental Mail Relay Service - Ask me!
Independent Security Consultant - SANS - OISSG
http://www.buanzo.com.ar/pro/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIBLGhAlpOsGhXcE0RCtYbAJ4mUDg+SuKzTtm2WmmO9JMUXKsAFgCeKDlb
gFy35ZZstEyENpOL92kgVuQ=
=YHDP
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: queued messages?

[Alejandro Guerrieri]

All boxes are reading the same conf files right?

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:09 AM, Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA512

 What does this mean (status page)?

SMS: received 1 (50 queued), sent 0 (0 queued), store size 50

 Could it be related to the smsbox_list empty warning??

 also, I'm using this new config for my sms-service:

group = sms-service
keyword = default
keyword-regex = .*
 ~
 max-messages = 0
catch-all = true
get-url = http://somesite.com/getsms.php?phone=%pmsg=%r;

 That's the only sms-service group. Any ideas why it doesn't work? I'm
 pretty sure it's related to
 the smsbox_list empty warning:


 2008-04-15 08:06:02 [5912] [4] WARNING: smsbox_list empty!
 (repeats the same number of queued messages in store, 51)

 - --
 Arturo Buanzo Busleiman
 Reliable inter-continental Mail Relay Service - Ask me!
 Independent Security Consultant - SANS - OISSG
 http://www.buanzo.com.ar/pro/
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
 Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

 iD8DBQFIBKj8AlpOsGhXcE0RClY6AJ9rtXtJiFdcRr0R5N6ynQi+GkMjKACfePti
 5Uq1tUVVVBMqYOiyvIto018=
 =FRIt
 -END PGP SIGNATURE-

RE: audit sent and queued messages to DB

[info.ubichip]

You could get all these informations from the sent_sms table in sqlbox.

Hope that helps.


-Original Message-
From: Knaan Ratosh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: dimanche 11 novembre 2007 02:28
To: seik
Cc: users@kannel.org
Subject: RE: audit sent and queued messages to DB

The problem is that I need to audit also success messages, and as I know the
dlr stores a message in the DB and then deletes it when it's delivered
successfully.

Knaan Ratosh
Acting VP RD
AxisMobile Ltd.
Consumer Mobile Email
Tel: Int +972-3-7685529
Mobile: Int +972-54-3138460
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: seik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 2:54 PM
To: Knaan Ratosh
Cc: users@kannel.org
Subject: Re: audit sent and queued messages to DB

well in case with queued you mean accepted  by the SMSC and still not
delivered to the recipient,
you may just use DLR reporting data inserted into db
each SMS should be sent with unique dlr smsid and proper value of the
expiration timeout.

from here you will deal with the sql queries i belive.



-Original Message-
From: Knaan Ratosh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 09 Ноември 2007 г.
To: seik
Subject:audit sent and queued messages to DB

 Hi,
 I need to store in an audit database information regarding messages that
were sent successfully, and ones that are
 queued. I need this because I need to perform some reporting on the
results - for example, report that counts the
 number of queued messages that were sent to a certain user within a range
of dates.
 Does anyone have any idea how to do that?
 
 Knaan Ratosh
 Acting VP RD
 AxisMobile Ltd.
 Consumer Mobile Email
 Tel: Int +972-3-7685529
 Mobile: Int +972-54-3138460
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 









This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer
viruses.










  _  

Antivirus avast! http://www.avast.com : message Sortant sain. 


Base de donnees virale (VPS) : 07-1, 11/11/2007
Analyse le : 11/11/2007 23:59:42
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.

RE: audit sent and queued messages to DB

[Knaan Ratosh]

The problem is that I need to audit also success messages, and as I know the 
dlr stores a message in the DB and then deletes it when it's delivered 
successfully.

Knaan Ratosh
Acting VP RD
AxisMobile Ltd.
Consumer Mobile Email
Tel: Int +972-3-7685529
Mobile: Int +972-54-3138460
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: seik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 2:54 PM
To: Knaan Ratosh
Cc: users@kannel.org
Subject: Re: audit sent and queued messages to DB

well in case with queued you mean accepted  by the SMSC and still not 
delivered to the recipient,
you may just use DLR reporting data inserted into db
each SMS should be sent with unique dlr smsid and proper value of the 
expiration timeout.

from here you will deal with the sql queries i belive.



-Original Message-
From: Knaan Ratosh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 09 Ноември 2007 г.
To: seik
Subject:audit sent and queued messages to DB 

 Hi,
 I need to store in an audit database information regarding messages that were 
 sent successfully, and ones that are
 queued. I need this because I need to perform some reporting on the results - 
 for example, report that counts the
 number of queued messages that were sent to a certain user within a range of 
 dates.
 Does anyone have any idea how to do that?
  
 Knaan Ratosh
 Acting VP RD
 AxisMobile Ltd.
 Consumer Mobile Email
 Tel: Int +972-3-7685529
 Mobile: Int +972-54-3138460
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  





 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses.

Re[2]: audit sent and queued messages to DB

[seikath]

well,
as far as i know,
Kannel's  External delivery report (DLR) storage comes to replace
the internal storage of the dlr info stored in the memory of the bearerbox 
process.
but it has NOTHING to do with the possibility of setting a unique dlr-url,
its just handles the kannel logic in matching kannel internal ID to the SMSC id 
 ...

in short, you set dlr-mask and unique dlr-ulr each time you send SMS.
in this case kannel will POST/GET the unique dlr-url when DLR SMS is received 
by the SMSC


example:
log form the web server:
/dlr.pgsql.php?smscID=mteldlr=8answer=ACK%2Fto=%2B359885100407from=1302ts=1194787318smsID=9e89b246415f6e6ffb8f327f4a53c938charset=ISO-8859-1kannel_id=01a68bbd-81ba-4785-b719-62dce0d28e17
 HTTP/1.1 200 1 - Kannel/cvs-20070627

in the above row, smsID value is a unique key /md5 sum/ in the db table for the 
MT traffic.
example for php script inserting the MT traffic in the sqlbox:

$dlrUrl=pg_escape_string(http://{$dlrhost[$recenthost]}:{$dlrport[$recenthost]}/dlr.pgsql.php?smscID=%idlr=%danswer=%Ato=%pfrom=%Pts=%TsmsID={$mesgid}charset=%Ckannel_id=%I;);

second example,
you use SQLBox to handle all MO MT DRL traffic in one table,
and there you may set some sql engine to handle the matching and tracking the 
messages per their unique id.
for that you would need for example Oracle or PostgreSQL with rules on insert 
in a view to simplify  the process.





-Original Message-
From: Knaan Ratosh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 11 Ноември 2007 г.
To: seikath
Subject:audit sent and queued messages to DB 

 The problem is that I need to audit also success messages, and as I
 know the dlr stores a message in the DB and then deletes it when it's 
 delivered
 successfully.

 Knaan Ratosh
 Acting VP RD
 AxisMobile Ltd.
 Consumer Mobile Email
 Tel: Int +972-3-7685529
 Mobile: Int +972-54-3138460
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 -Original Message-
 From: seik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 2:54 PM
 To: Knaan Ratosh
 Cc: users@kannel.org
 Subject: Re: audit sent and queued messages to DB

 well in case with queued you mean accepted  by the SMSC and still not 
 delivered to the recipient,
 you may just use DLR reporting data inserted into db
 each SMS should be sent with unique dlr smsid and proper value of the 
 expiration timeout.

 from here you will deal with the sql queries i belive.



 -Original Message-
 From: Knaan Ratosh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 09 Ноември 2007 г.
 To: seik
 Subject:audit sent and queued messages to DB 

 Hi,
 I need to store in an audit database information regarding messages that 
 were sent successfully, and ones that are
 queued. I need this because I need to perform some reporting on the results 
 - for example, report that counts the
 number of queued messages that were sent to a certain user within a range of 
 dates.
 Does anyone have any idea how to do that?
  
 Knaan Ratosh
 Acting VP RD
 AxisMobile Ltd.
 Consumer Mobile Email
 Tel: Int +972-3-7685529
 Mobile: Int +972-54-3138460
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  





  
  
 
 This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
 PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
 viruses.
 

audit sent and queued messages to DB

[Knaan Ratosh]

Hi,

I need to store in an audit database information regarding messages that
were sent successfully, and ones that are queued. I need this because I
need to perform some reporting on the results - for example, report that
counts the number of queued messages that were sent to a certain user
within a range of dates.

Does anyone have any idea how to do that?

 

Knaan Ratosh

Acting VP RD

AxisMobile Ltd.

Consumer Mobile Email

Tel: Int +972-3-7685529

Mobile: Int +972-54-3138460

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Re: audit sent and queued messages to DB

[seik]

well in case with queued you mean accepted  by the SMSC and still not 
delivered to the recipient,
you may just use DLR reporting data inserted into db
each SMS should be sent with unique dlr smsid and proper value of the 
expiration timeout.

from here you will deal with the sql queries i belive.



-Original Message-
From: Knaan Ratosh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 09 Ноември 2007 г.
To: seik
Subject:audit sent and queued messages to DB 

 Hi,
 I need to store in an audit database information regarding messages that were 
 sent successfully, and ones that are
 queued. I need this because I need to perform some reporting on the results – 
 for example, report that counts the
 number of queued messages that were sent to a certain user within a range of 
 dates.
 Does anyone have any idea how to do that?
  
 Knaan Ratosh
 Acting VP RD
 AxisMobile Ltd.
 Consumer Mobile Email
 Tel: Int +972-3-7685529
 Mobile: Int +972-54-3138460
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]