Sorry, my post wasn't related to the performance question. It was in response to your doubt regarding the 8 port modem connectivity. Avoid hubs to improve the reliability of your solution.
--Nizam On Tuesday, July 31, 2012 8:22:05 PM UTC+5:30, MaxX wrote: > > I am inserting the modems ( the 2 currently I have ) into a USB port each. > I assume the modem contains some kind of USB to serial converter ... So I > am not using a HUB but that's what the driver is being recognized by the OS > > I didn't have any port lockouts so far ... and I am using Linux ( CentOS > 6.2 ) > Still my question holds ... would serial modems make any difference in > terms of performance ? > Anyone had any experience with both ? > > Regards, > MaxX > > > On Tuesday, July 31, 2012 5:42:50 PM UTC+3, Nizam wrote: >> >> Serial-USB-Serial conversion is better avoided if possible. If going for >> the USB option make sure you have enough USB ports on the server itself >> without having to introduce a USB hub. I've tried many hubs and all of them >> ended up causing frequent port lockups on Windows. >> >> On Tuesday, July 31, 2012 5:56:35 PM UTC+5:30, MaxX wrote: >>> >>> Thanks for your answer ... >>> >>> I have 2 modems each one in an USB port >>> i've been testing different setups with my USBs ports to try to find >>> best setup. After your email I thougt that if I put them in different ports >>> / motherboards hubs will make any difference. but it didn't >>> >>> 1st question that I have now is if serial modems will make any >>> difference. I plan to buy a 8 port modem pool and I can't decide if to buy >>> USB or RS232 ( via multiserial board ) >>> >>> 2nd one is actually an ideea ... to create a QueueManger thread for each >>> gateway and eventually have 10 paralel threads for 10 modems ending with >>> the possibility to send independently SMS via 2 modems (almost) at the same >>> time >>> >>> Not sure how QueueManger is implemented now ... I'll dig into it >>> >>> Regards, >>> Marius >>> >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, July 28, 2012 12:06:19 PM UTC+3, T.Delenikas wrote: >>>> >>>> Well, I tried to find something (like a recent change in code, perhaps) >>>> that could justify this, with no luck. >>>> On the other hand, this issue has been reported again recently, so >>>> something is really going on here... >>>> >>>> The really bad thing is that I currently don't have access to a >>>> multi-serial board in order to test things. >>>> I've seen that USB hubs (or maybe their drivers?) sometimes appear as >>>> if they lock concurrent port access. I am not the most appropriate person >>>> to follow low-level specs and controller capabilities, but I've seen >>>> articles like this: >>>> http://www.avsforum.com/t/1277379/recommendation-please-most-reliable-self-powered-7-port-usb-hub >>>> >>>> which suggest that low-level hubs may indeed have a problem allowing >>>> concurrent access to all ports. I've seen terms like " *Supports 4 >>>> Concurrent Non-periodic Transactions* ". I guess that all of these >>>> references have something to do with the hub's ability to allow concurrent >>>> port access and how many individual controllers they have (i.e. ports per >>>> controller ration). Do you or anybody else know something about it??? >>>> >>>> Needless to say that such hubs have a cost of $50 - $100 + - check this >>>> one: http://www.cooldrives.com/12poinusb20h.html and have nothing to >>>> do with the $10 hubs found in every stupid accessory store... >>>> >>>> On Thursday, July 26, 2012 9:54:21 PM UTC+3, MaxX wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> modems via USB ... >>>>> pl2303: Prolific PL2303 USB to serial adaptor driver >>>>> >>>>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SMSLib Discussion Group" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/smslib/-/vPhvAwe8P_sJ. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
