most likely you didn't optimize mysql most work sqlbox is being done on INSERT rather than SELECT and DELETE, try using INSERT DELAYED instead of INSERT in SQLBOX_MYSQL_INSERT_QUERY in gw/sqlbox_mysql.h or optimize your MySQL setup.
try also to test kannel's speed without sqlbox involved at all without database, might be a problem on your smsc operator side as well. 2012/7/16 Ashish Agarwal <ashisha...@gmail.com> > Hello Eric, > > Sqlbox selects query uses limit 0,1 where it is selecting only one row at > a time. So running one more instance on the same database may duplicate the > record. Does it make sense to change the limit value and recompile sqlbox, > but I doubt this may not delete the row with relative sqlbox_id after > selecting. > On Jul 16, 2012 8:35 PM, "Eric Turner" <e...@txtwire.com> wrote: > >> I have never done it but I would guess that all you would need to do is >> create a separate instance of sqlbox either on the same computer or >> a separate computer what points to the same bearerbox. >> >> Not sure if it is possible. Not sure how smart sqlbox is with two >> sqlboxes reading out of the same table. If it isn't that smart you could >> have two sqlboxes pointing at the same bearerbox but reading from different >> tables and you make your application smart enough to put half of the >> messages in one table and half in the other table. That >> should theoretically work get two sqlboxes feeding the same bearerbox. >> >> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Ashish Agarwal <ashisha...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Hello Eric, >>> >>> I think adding another sqlbox is a good option but how can I add another >>> sqlbox? >>> On Jul 16, 2012 6:37 PM, "Eric Turner" <e...@txtwire.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Since it is compiled code. You could either look through the source >>>> code and see where you could make improvements or you could add a second >>>> sqlbox. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Ashish Agarwal >>>> <ashisha...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> With sqlbox I have around 15,00,000 number of record in send_sms table >>>>> and bearerbox is sending sms at approximately 200 to 300 TPS, but >>>>> bearerbox >>>>> with my smsc has much higher capacity to submit sms to smsc around 400 to >>>>> 500 TPS but since sqlbox is not able to send too many sms to the store of >>>>> bearerbox at a time I am not able to achieve good throughput with my smsc. >>>>> >>>>> Therefore, is there a way wherein sqlbox can read messages from >>>>> send_sms table at a very high speed so that message can be stored in queue >>>>> and my smsc connections can be utilize to the maximum. >>>>> >>>>> Please suggest. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Ashish Agarwal >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>
