Hello All,
I'll try to answer in one email :)
On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 at 20:32, dww <dwort...@mykolab.com> wrote:
> However, Denis, I think your experiment with multiple devices would be
> valuable as then there is only one browser tab or window with the OM
> room open as a guest on each device. Perhaps that will make a
> difference.
>
yes, this would be better test (even if "fake" camera is used)
>
> Dennis
>
> On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 08:24 -0500, dww wrote:
> > Thanks, Denis,
> >
> > Back on Oct. 17 Maxim provided the following Bash script to be run on
> > the machine with a client side browser for the psuedo guest users. (
> > Use another machine to create the room administratively and send
> > invitations) This is a far simpler way to stress test the client side
> > browser.
> >
> > Dennis
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > i just have tried the following script
> > started as `./run10.sh 5`
> >
> > everything seems to work, but my CPU was 800% busy (all cores were
> > 100%
> > busy)
> >
> > without `--use-fake-device-for-media-stream` parameter I had lots of
> > permission errors due to camera was "captured" by first browser
> > other have reported "Camera busy" error
> >
> >
> > _HASH_HERE_ - should be replaced with real hash (I have created
> > endless
> > invitation hash to the private conference room)
> >
> > the script
> > ===============================================
> > #!/bin/bash
> >
> > i=$1
> >
> > if [ -z "${i}" ]; then
> > i=30
> > fi
> > let "i += 0"
> >
> > rm -rf /tmp/delme*
> >
> > while ((i--)); do
> > #echo "${i}"
> > mkdir /tmp/delme${i}
> >
> > #local conference
> > chromium-browser --user-data-dir=/tmp/delme${i} --disable-infobars
> > --no-default-browser-check --allow-insecure-localhost
> > --use-fake-device-for-media-stream '
> >
> https://localhost:5443/openmeetings/hash?invitation=_HASH_HERE_&language=1
> '
> > &
> > done
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 01:53 -0600, Denis Noctor wrote:
> > > Hi there everyone, this seems to be the “elephant in the room”
> > > discussion, while there has been a HUGE amount of development and
> > > progress in OM since March (thank you so much @Maxim) ... there is
> > > the whole issue of, for example, the number of users per room...
> > > which seems to be about 5-6 (and maybe even to 7) when pushed to
> > > the
> > > limit... with both audio and video being broadcasted from all
> > > users... and, something else.. if there are simultaneous
> > > classes/sessions being held on the same server... will this
> > > restrict
> > > things even further? Is this an overall limitation
Sebastian did some AWS based testing
And, if i'm not mistaken, the server with 4GB RAM was able to handle at
least 3 rooms of 5 people
(5.1.0-SNAPSHOT should behave better than 5.0.1)
to increase the number of rooms you can use cluster
> to using a
> > > browser
> > > based approach... or should we be taking approach?
>
well,
there is "The Limit"
KMS can handle only certain amount of multimedia connections
additionally there are other limits:
- bandwidth
- CPU
- RAM
- open files (network socket is a file)
"The Limit" is something I'm not sure how to deal with (yet)
> > >
> > > It was my intention to test out the OM “demo servers” over the last
> > > 2
> > > weeks but will take today off and try to test 10 real device
> > > connections... with a combination of desktops, laptops, android
> > > tablets and maybe even the odd iPhone or two.
>
Apple devices has issues with sound (outgoing)
I'm still investigating this one
> > >
> > > My million dollar question is... prior to WebRTC and Kurento... was
> > > it possible to have 5-10 users in a room with audio and video
> > > working
> > > seamlessly in previous versions (for example, the old “flash” setup
> > > (which will be redundant after Christmas... Chrome etc
> > > notifications)
> > > and if so, what has changed?
>
Yes this was possible
OM_before_5 was based on Red5 media server
Unfortunately it's open source version has no WebRTC support
> > >
> > > If there is anyone out there that has no problem with user numbers
> > > (using audio and vid)... exceeding a body of 7-10+, please let us
> > > know.
> > >
> > > In the meantime, I’ll give you my feedback on my tests.
> > >
> > > I really appreciate everything that has been done to date.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > > On Nov 9, 2020, at 4:50 PM, dww <dwort...@mykolab.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello Maxim,
> > > >
> > > > A couple of weeks ago there was an email thread about the 5 total
> > > > users
> > > > for one room, each user with video/microphone under the
> > > > Subject: "docker container clustering experiments #1".
For whatever reason you love to start new mail threads :))))
> In this
> > > > case
> > > > it
> > > > appears the bottleneck is the CPU usage on the client machine
> > > > with
> > > > the
> > > > browser.
> > > >
> > > > In a response to Denis Noctor on a similar thread you mentioned
> > > > to
> > > > try
> > > > the following:
> > > >
> > > > "please check allowed amount of opened files for the user who
> > > > starts
> > > > OM/KMS/TURN
> > > > increasing it might help"
> > > >
> > > > Might this help with the issue we discussed? Where approximately
> > > > do
> > > > I
> > > > set the allowed amount of opened files?
>
KMS seems to drop connections when there is not enough files
(network socket is a file)
you can check the limit for current user using `ulimit -n` (`ulimit -a` to
see all limits)
to check limit for `nobody` user `su nobody --shell /bin/bash --command
"ulimit -n"`
to increase the limit i'm changing `/etc/security/limits.conf` file
https://github.com/openmeetings/openmeetings-docker/blob/48b72f4d0f38a0fab2021a0a2e4d6693c61c00be/scripts/om_euser.sh#L35
(seems to work at Ubuntu)
> > > >
> > > > Also are there any other things that can be tried to improve this
> > > > scalability? Are there areas in the code that can be examined to
> > > > investigate how to improve this?
>
KMS cluster would be ultimate solution, I guess
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Dennis
> > > >
> > > >
>
>
--
Best regards,
Maxim
