On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 08:23:48AM -0700, Steve Edwards wrote: > On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Shaun Ruffell wrote: > > >240 channels in meetme comming from an 8-span digital card? I > >would have to measure it...but my guess is a pretty beefy system. > >In this configuration, more speed on less cores would serve you > >better than more cores. > > Would that advice apply if the 240 channels are distributed to a > bunch of separate 'meetmes' or is the assumption that all 240 are in > a single meetme?
Currently, the mixing in the kernel is always serialized on the "masterspan", so regardless of how many conferences you have in the system only one CPU will do the mixing for all of them. So, I would say generally for meetme-based conferencing I would give preference to more power on each core as opposed to adding more cores. Hopefully in the next year I'll find time in the future to work on the changes necessary to allow the conferencing to be spread out to the various cores. Probably just as everyone finally is able to switch to confbridge and not need meetme anymore. -- Shaun Ruffell Digium, Inc. | Linux Kernel Developer 445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA Check us out at: www.digium.com & www.asterisk.org -- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
