No memory problems. It is reasonable that kannel will use more memory in
higher traffic, since all queues are in memory, as long as it drops to
nominal levels once the traffic is gone.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: sangprabv
To: brett skinner
Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; kannel users
Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 5:59 PM
Subject: Re: Kannel performance benchmarking
Hi Nikos,
Do you experience memory problem? In my case Kannel is eating the memory on
high load traffics. I always need to restart the box to get more memory. I
even give 3 on /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches but still Kannel eat the memory :(
sangprabv
[email protected]
http://www.petitiononline.com/froyo/
On Aug 9, 2010, at 9:42 PM, brett skinner wrote:
Hi Nikos
Out of curiosity can you go into more detail regarding what hardware you
were running and your setup for MySql? Were you using Innodb or MyIsam. If
you were using Innodb did you make any other configuration changes to MySql
to accommodate Innodb.
From the user guide it is implied that the bottle neck for Kannel is the
number of messages that the SMSC can accommodate per second. Is this still
the case?
Regards,
2010/8/8 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]>
Hi,
I have run some benchmarking for a client using fakesmpp. Using the default
service for MO's I got:
MO's: 1400 SMS/s
MT + DLRs (internal): 747 SMS/s
MT + DLRs (MySql): 434 SMS/s
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected]
To: kannel users
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:22 PM
Subject: Kannel performance benchmarking
Hi,
I am interested to know about the kannel performance benchmarking,
especially in terms of speed (msgs/sec), MO or MT. I assume that multiple
smsboxes does not have any effect over kannel performance, since the
front-end talking to SMSC is the main bearerbox. What is the max speed that
could be attained by kannel and/or bearerbox?
Regards,
Hamza
