On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 1:26 PM, [email protected] <
[email protected]> wrote:

>  On 2/5/2010 11:30 AM, Tony Graziano wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 11:38 AM, [email protected] <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> It was a reply to this link
>>
>> http://forum.sipfoundry.org/index.php?t=msg&th=282&goto=607&S=db5c3778fa9b727b976eace76c6e5763#msg_607
>>
>> On 2/5/2010 10:32 AM, mkitchin.public wrote:
>> > Old thread, but did you have any issues with this device? I
>> > found one with the same specs and then ran across your
>> > thread
>> > http://www.logicsupply.com/products/ion_gs_l05
>> > I'm thinking about it for small branch offices that have
>> > roughly the same number of users that you mention. I'm
>> > looking for greater reliability from having no moving
>> > parts.
>> >
>>
>>
> Realize a lot of input is probably helpful in sizing small systems (limited
> memory capacity and/or processing capability) going forward in 4.2, since a
> lot of features are being added (IM, etc.) and a new voicemail system too.
> If the sipconfig starts crawling to load it, it's not going to be very
> useful for anyone.
>
>  While those systems are small, the processor would concern me. You would
> be better off to go with a small system with regular components. I would, as
> man, like to see one that is flash friendly, but I see a limited lifespan of
> the drive the way the technology exists and the way the software loads in
> it. When sipxecs has "firmware" (OS and sipx modules on flash) separate from
> "configuration and data" (voicemail, xml config data etc. on normal
> storage), then it would be really exciting, but not as flexible in the
> hardware department.
>
>
> I was going by Scott and Dale's comments (pasted below) which indicate that
> is more than adequate CPU and the CPU needs were actually decreasing with
> 4.2. I am going to put 4 GB RAM in it, so that is the most the 32 bit OS can
> use anyway.
> Why would you say I would be better off with regular components? I plan to
> pick this drive:
> Emphase Industrial 32 GB SLC
> The general consensus I find is that these drives should last longer than I
> would need.
> http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=223173
> http://www.edn.com/article-partner/CA6319917.html
> Most systems I have seen (especially in dusty closets like these will be
> in) have had a moving part fail within a few years. If I'm going to have to
> decentralize, I need to make it as reliable as I can without spending the
> money required for server grade hardware.
>
> Scott:
>
> "That's plenty. More RAM would be nice for future-proofing, but the CPU
> needs of a system like you describe are very small and that should be
> fine."
>
> Dale:
>
> "RAM is much more important than CPU. 2GB should be plenty for 15
> phones, but be able to increase it if you need to.
> For CPU, the major burden is the voicemail system. (In 4.2, we will
> replace it with a new voicemail system that is much more CPU-efficient.)
> With 15 phones, you are unlikely to have more than 2 voicemail sessions
> at one time, and for that 2 x 1.6GHz CPU is more than enough. (2 x
> 2.0GHz can handle 10 sessions.)"
>
>

I'll stick with what I said. The methods used by sipx to generate config
files, push jobs, etc., probably mean more constant use of the write
process. I think general read/write performance is fine on solid state
devices, but just recently it's been suggested that notebooks/netbooks will
probably suffer more failures with SSD than a normal drive. Go figure.

The CPU is less intensive with Freeswitch? Really? Mine stays off the charts
for AA, so until I see the rubber meeting the road I won't venture there
when it comes to FS and CPU. As for everything else (like IM and the other
new features, I guess if they use "zero" that wouldn't matter, but since I'd
have to go through a build environment to get there and see, I certainly
can't understand how that would be.

Good luck. Be very interested in hearing how it goes.
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list [email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/

Reply via email to