On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 13:12 -0400, Joly, Robert (CAR:9D30) wrote: > Scott Lawrence wrote: > > > Let's make a note to try to set up a large scale (at least > > 100's of NATed UAs) test to see if there's an important difference. > > I implemented the shortened registration times for NAT traversal on my > working copy and proceeded to measure the performance impact of the > change. For non-NATed phones, the registration expiry range remains 300 > to 7200 seconds and for NATed phones, I use a much reduced range of 180 > to 300 seconds. I did my performance measurements on a Dell OptiPlex > 745 equipped with an Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2GHz. All performance > measurements were done using custom SIPp scripts simulating 1000 > registrants and CPU utilization measurements were averaged over a 10 > minute period starting 5 minutes after the beginning of the test using > the 'sar' utility. > > Performance Measurement #1 > ========================== > 1000 Non-NATed registrants requesting an Expiry or 3600 seconds and > refreshing half-way through expiry > SipXproxy Average CPU Util (%user %system): 0.47 0.03 > SipXproxy Average CPU Util (%user %system): 0.79 0.03 > Total: 1.32% of one CPU > > Performance Measurement #2 > ========================== > 1000 NATed registrants requesting an Expiry or 3600 seconds and > refreshing half-way through expiry > SipXproxy Average CPU Util (%user %system): 5.29 0.42 > SipXproxy Average CPU Util (%user %system): 3.41 0.17 > Total: 9.29% of one CPU > > Performance Measurement #3 > ========================== > 1000 NATed registrants requesting an Expiry or 3600 seconds and > refreshing 30 seconds before expiry > SipXproxy Average CPU Util (%user %system): 3.15 0.23 > SipXproxy Average CPU Util (%user %system): 2.74 0.11 > Total: 6.23% of one CPU > > My Conclusions: > The performance measurements were done using an aggressive remote user > count of 1000 and was conducted on a very moderately-powered server > model and even in these conditions, the registration process did not > consume more than 10% of one CPU of the multi-core system (9.29% in the > worst case and 6.23% in the best). Given these results and the fact > that the registration expiry intervals for NATed and non-NATed users > will be configurable via the registrar-config file, I conclude it is > safe, from a performance POV, to introduce this feature. > > Anybody disagrees?
Gotta love real numbers. I concur. _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
