I am new to Freeswitch.
After default installation of Freswitch 1.4, I noticed big latency while performing simple telephony operations.
i.e. when I called one extension from another, the called number started ringing 10 seconds after initialization of call. Same happened with conference bridge, it took 10 seconds for a callee to enter in conference.
Same time my colleague's Freeswitch was performing well. I inquired him and came to know he only changed default password.
To my surprise when I did that my Freeswitch was faster than light.
It looks a weired case.
Is it default behavior of Freswitch?
Can anyone from Freeswitch elaborate what happened in my case?
Got answer from Freeswitch Team member Anthony Minessale II :
The sample configuration you install when you setup FreeSWITCH actually has an extension that executes sleep 10 when you have the default password set. It also has a large warning message on your console explaining that you should not leave you system running with the default config unless you at least change the default password.
You should change the default password because FreeSwitch will be paused for approximately 10s if you're still using the default config.
Just change the default config and the delay will be gone.
Related
I am testing .NET version of ZeroMQ to understand how to handle network failures. I put the server (pub socket) to one external machine and debugging the client (sub socket). If I stop my local Wi-Fi connection for seconds, then ZeroMQ automatically recovers and I even get remaining values. However, if I disable Wi-Fi for longer time like a minute, then it just gets stuck on a frame waiting. How can I configure this period when ZeroMQ is still able to recover? And how can I reconnect manually after, say, several minutes? How can I understand that the socket is locked and I need to kill/open again?
Q :" How can I configure this ... ?"
A :Use the .NET versions of zmq_setsockopt() detailed parameter settings - family of link-management parameters alike ZMQ_RECONNECT_IVL, ZMQ_RCVTIMEO and the likes.
All other questions depend on your code.
If using blocking-forms of the .recv()-methods, you can easily throw yourself into unsalvageable deadlocks, best never block your own code ( why one would ever deliberately lose one's own code domain-of-control ).
If in a need to indeed understand low-level internal link-management details, do not hesitate to use zmq_socket_monitor() instrumentation ( if not available in .NET binding, still may use another language to see details the monitor-instance reports about link-state and related events ).
I was able to find an answer on their GitHub https://github.com/zeromq/netmq/issues/845. Seems that the behavior is by design as I got the same with native zmq lib via .NET binding.
Practical Challenge:
I have a LR script that runs against an app being mocked and do not have a logout button (yet).
The test runs fine With stable response time for about 10 minutes, but after that the response time peaks and the server goes into 99% memory usage and transactions start to fail.
I suspect this is due to the script does not terminate the vusers after each run anf it builds up a lot of running sessions against the server wich is not terminated. But I might be wrong.
Anyays I want to programatically close each run after it has competed the business process.
I have red somewhere that web_set_sockets_option ("SHUTDOWN_MODE", "ABRUPT") could be used for this, but I want to be sure that this function actually does what I want and what does 'ABRUPT' means?
Are there better ways of closing sessions? Clicking the close browser during recording does not result in anything being captured in the script.
It's a server issue on session aging. Your server admin for your website can adjust the timeout values where no activity has taken place on a given session. By default most places have this set at 30 minutes. Trim it to what you need rather than taking the default value on the server.
Also, you may have hit a leak situation if resources are constantly accumulated on the server side but never released.
Based on your question I assume you're using the WEB/HTML protocol. I agree that the core issue is that your app's sessions should expire more elegantly and probably sooner. But, in order to get beyond this while testing you can try this. It isn't a guarantee, but it has worked sometimes for me in the past when dealing with similar situations. Try changing your Run-time Settings for the script:
Run-time Settings > Browser > Browser Emulation
Make sure you have the box checked for "Simulate a new user on each iteration". You can also try playing with the other settings here, like clearing the cache each iteration. This could cause a new connection setting with the web page for each iteration depending on the server's session settings. Again, this isn't 100%, but it has worked for me from time to time.
try this:
web_set_sockets_option("CLOSE_KEEPALIVE_CONNECTIONS", "1");
I observe the following weird behavior. I have an Azure web role which is deployed on love Azure cloud. Now I click "Configure" in the Azure Management Portal and change the number of instances - the portal shows some "activity". Now I open the browser and navigate to the URL assigned to my deployment and start refreshing the page something like once per two seconds. The page reloads fine many times and then fro some time it will stop reloading - the request will be rejected, then after something like half a minute the requests are handled normally.
What is happening? Is the web server temporarily stopped? How do I change number of instances so that HTTP requests to the role are handled at all times?
When you change the configuration file, your current instance might be restarted. This might be the reason you met with, which your website didn't response in about 30 seconds.
Please have a look http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/microsoft.windowsazure.serviceruntime.roleenvironment.changing.aspx and check if it 's because of the role restarting.
What you are doing is manual. Have you looked at the SDK for autoscaling Azure?
http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Autoscaling-Windows-Azure-applications
Check out the demo at the 18 minute mark. It doesn't answer your question directly, but its a much more configurable/dynamic way of scaling Azure.
Azure updates your roles one update domain at a time, so in theory you should see no downtime when updating the config (provided you have at least two instances). However, if you refresh the browser every couple of seconds, it's possible that your requests go always to the same instance due to keep-alive.
It would be interesting to know what the behavior is if you disable keep-alives for your webrole. Note that this will have a performance impact, so you'll probably want to re-enable keep-alives after the exercise.
I am using a modified version of the TaskCloud example to try and read/write my own data.
While testing on a a deployed version, I've noticed that the round-trip response time is slow.
From my Android device, I have a 100ms ping response to appspot.com.
I have changed the AppEngine application to do nothing (The Google Dashboard shows insignificant Average Latency.
The problem is that the time it takes for HttpClient client .execute(post) is about 3 seconds.
(This is the time when an instance is already loaded)
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
EDIT: I've watched the video of Google I/O showing the CloudTasks Android-AppEngine app, and you can see that refreshing the list (a single call to AppEngine) takes about 3 seconds as well. The guy is saying something about performance which I didn't fully get (debuggers are running at both ends?)
The video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7SxNNC429U&feature=related
Time location: 0:46:45
I'll keep investigating...
Thanks for your help so far.
EDIT 2: Back to this issue...
I've used shark packet sniffer to find out what is happening. Some of the time is spent negotiating a SSL connection for each server call. Using http (and ACSID) is faster than https (and SACSID).
new DefaultHttpClient() and new HttpPost() are used for each server call.
EDIT 3:
Looking at the sniffer logs again, there is an almost 2 seconds delay before the actual POST.
I have also found out that the issue exists with Android 2.2 (all versions) but is resolved with Android 2.3
EDIT 4: It's been resolved. Please see my answer below.
It's difficult to answer your question since no detail about your app is provided. Anyway you can try to use appstats tool provided by Google to analyze the bottleneck.
After using the Shark sniffer, I was able to understand the exact issue and I've found the answer in this question.
I have used Liudvikas Bukys's comment and solved the problem using the suggested line:
post.getParams().setBooleanParameter(CoreProtocolPNames.USE_EXPECT_CONTINUE, false);
Often the first call to your GAE app will take longer than subsequent calls. You should make yourself familiar with loading and warm-up requests and how GAE handles instances of your app: http://code.google.com/intl/de-DE/appengine/docs/adminconsole/instances.html
Some things you could also try:
make your app handle more than one request per instance (make sure your app is threadsafe!) http://code.google.com/intl/de-DE/appengine/docs/java/config/appconfig.html#Using_Concurrent_Requests
enable always on feature in app admin (this will cost you)
I've got a service that acts as a watchdog for several apps/servers. There are no user sessions on this machine. I'd like the watchdog to be capable of beeping on the internal speaker should something go wrong (that'd be my queue to go fix whatever it's complaining about)
when I try the Beep() API on Windows nothing happens - I suspect the problem is that the services session isnt permitted to make noises?
can I make this work? any other ideas for how to make the service alert me?
-CG
Call CreateFile on \device\beep, then send down IOCTL_BEEP_SET (see http://www.koders.com/c/fidFEC3527B9D951559D62722A9C0C603863106CA9B.aspx for details)
It may work if you allow it to interact with the desktop (an option configurable somewhere, I can't remember where).
But personally, I'd have it email me.
Though maybe you could have it use the task scheduling API to schedule a task for yourself, so next time you log on you can see it.
I don't know; you've got a few options. I'd avoid beeping though.
Try sending beep char "\a" to console. Not sure if it will work.
Beeping doesn't seem like a good idea - it might end up driving everyone mad....
I'd also agree about the "interact with desktop" option and you set this in the services parameters see A Windows Service without a template
I'd recommend creating a simple client application that polls that server to query for any problems and returns a set of status messages. Then an appropriate UI would be raised (e.g. balloon on the tray), an email sent, etc. containing any warning or failure messages.
This way you also know that the watchdog itself is running and has network connectivity - if the watchdog dies and/or machine locks up you wouldn't otherwise know.
It also avoids being thrown out of a window when the machine starts beeping continuously just after you go to lunch. [+1 to #mikej] :-)
The poll period should be around half (see Nyquist sampling rate) your minimum required response time.