Yeah, but this doesnt really solve the problem for MT messages - as in this case an external application needs to load balance the throughput instead of Kannel. And if i'm limited in speed (and i am) , neither bearerbox will know how many messages has another one sent so far...
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:30 AM, Illimar Reinbusch <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi > > Does Kannel architecture allow scaling bearerbox in any way? >> >> Right now i have kannel running on one machine and a second machine >> standing by to take over (by heartbeat) in case of the first machine >> failure. >> But thats only redundancy. >> >> I see that i can create a lot of smsboxes to connect to one bearerbox, but >> this still leaves me with a single potential bottleneck since all the >> connections to the operators are made from one process. >> >> I have resolved this problem by opening 2/4/6 connections to operator, > so i have 1 SMSC/1 Bearerbox/ 1 smsbox on one server and 1 SMSC/1 > Bearerbox/ 1 smsbox on second server. If one server fails, then all messages > will come thru second connection, during normal operation both connections > work and i have load-balancing scenario. > > Illimar >
