VoIP Mailing List Archives
Mailing list archives for the VoIP community |
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rob at hillis.dyndns.org
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 2:33 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
 |
|
PC's age and when they age, things tend to go wrong, particularly when
you upgrade software. Unusual crashes are usually the first sign that
something is going wrong.
To me, it sounds like you've put the money into many of the right areas
- segregating your voice and data networks, going with decent phones and
ensuring your power is reliable so it just seems a little strange to go
cheap on the actual server.
It sounds like you've been pretty lucky with this machine - not all
desktop machines are going to be anywhere near that reliable. The big
thing that server grade machines give you is better quality of parts
that have been extensively tested with a range of operating systems. I
guess it's up to you - personally, I'd take the warning signs and start
planning to replace the server. Possibly I'm just a little more
cautious than some. 
Ira wrote:
| Quote: | At 04:44 AM 1/19/2008, you wrote:
Well, it's been very reliable. It's been running 24/7 for 2 years and
the only problems have been my putting bugs in the dial plan,
problems with SIP providers going broke and trying 1.4. So how
exactly would more expensive hardware have improved my reliability?
I really wanted it to be reliable. I ran a duplicate network for the
phones so they don't share bandwidth, I bought good phones.
Everything is POE with the POE switch, the Asterisk box and all the
networking stuff to the outside on a big UPS.
Do you actually think the odds of a HP desktop sitting on a UPS in a
cool corner doing nothing suddenly dying are much greater than a
bottom end server box doing the same? It seems to me unless I want
to go dual PS and flash drives that I'm not going to do much better
than I have now.
Ira
| Quote: | What you run it on is very much a function of how reliable you want
the system to be. The better the hardware, the more reliable it
will be. If you're running in a business environment, then I
wouldn't recommend anything less than server grade - even if it's
low end server grade. The company I work for supplies either Dell
PowerEdge 860s (1RU servers that are similar in price to an upper
mid-range desktop) or Dell PowerEdge 840s (tower cases that are
similar in price to a mid-range desktop)
Running on cheap hardware is a great way to cost yourself more in
the long run - in lost productivity, lost sales and IT support.
| Quote: | Except that it's been running 1.2 for 2 years with no problems. It
has to handle all of about 20 to 30 calls/day so it's not really
under much load and I see no reason why it should be a problem. If
not for the TDM404 I would probably try to put it on a NSLU2. What
would you recommend I run it on?
|
|
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20080120/b08fe9b6/attachment.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tzafrir.cohen at xorco...
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 2:43 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 06:33:31PM +1100, Rob Hillis wrote:
| Quote: | PC's age and when they age, things tend to go wrong, particularly when
you upgrade software. Unusual crashes are usually the first sign that
something is going wrong.
|
And suddenly the same PC has "unaged" when reverting to 1.2?
Again, you don't have enough data to be conclusive on that. So I humbly
suggest that you won't be.
--
Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755 jabber:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
+972-50-7952406 mailto:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
http://www.xorcom.com iax:guest at local.xorcom.com/tzafrir |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dhartman at djhsolutio...
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 3:01 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
| Quote: | On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 06:33:31PM +1100, Rob Hillis wrote:
| Quote: | PC's age and when they age, things tend to go wrong, particularly when
you upgrade software. Unusual crashes are usually the first sign that
something is going wrong.
|
And suddenly the same PC has "unaged" when reverting to 1.2?
Again, you don't have enough data to be conclusive on that. So I humbly
suggest that you won't be.
|
It's more likely that there is something in the configs or dialplan that
works fine in 1.2 but does not work well in 1.4. I have several
machines that I migrated to Asterisk 1.4 that all are behaving just
fine. My major motivation for moving to 1.4 was DTMF.
--
Darrick Hartman
DJH Solutions, LLC
http://www.djhsolutions.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
digium at sanguinarius...
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 5:03 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
| Quote: |
Well, there is not enough data to suggest that. Before blaming Ira for
being such a cheap fellow (after all, he didn't buy one of those IBM big
iorns to run Asterisk on) we should also consider that the upgrade to
1.4 probably also involved an upgrade of Zaptel, which *is* kernel
space.
|
Does that make someone cheap? My callweaver test system is running on a
S/H big heavy IBM server (with redundant PSU, hotswapable, RAID etc.).
Admittedly it was very competatively priced. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stotaro at mail.schoff...
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 5:11 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
Thomas Kenyon wrote:
| Quote: | Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
| Quote: | Well, there is not enough data to suggest that. Before blaming Ira for
being such a cheap fellow (after all, he didn't buy one of those IBM big
iorns to run Asterisk on) we should also consider that the upgrade to
1.4 probably also involved an upgrade of Zaptel, which *is* kernel
space.
|
Does that make someone cheap? My callweaver test system is running on a
S/H big heavy IBM server (with redundant PSU, hotswapable, RAID etc.).
Admittedly it was very competatively priced.
|
Cheap, Frugal, Price Savvy, all may be labels for calling someone
cheap. I call it sound fiscal policy providing what you use suits your
needs and does not cost you more in the long run.
I have even seen an Emachine running a somewhat busy PBX with over
year's uptime. I would call that a gamble but certainly it has paid off
for them.
Thanks,
Steve Totaro |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hwit at a-domani.nl
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 6:57 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 13:26 +1100, Rob Hillis wrote:
| Quote: | I wasn't intending to blame Ira for his own problems - I was intending
to point out that running a production system on discarded hardware is
a really bad idea.
|
Let me jump in on that.
Some other posters mention (un-)aging of systems.
All part of your system (being cots, commercial or military grade) that
have moving parts, or are heated up, will degrade.
So if you use forced air cooling of cpu / gpu / northbridge /
southbridge / psu / hdd, these have to be replaced after some years. No
matter wether if they are working fine or not. For those parts are MTBF
defined, and you can not win from statistics.
Same is true about the HDD itself (moving parts & heat). Replace them
after their expected lifetime is thrue.
This is true for all manufactured machines, cheap or expensive.
But it gets worse for machines from the around-the-corner shop.
I found out, over and over again sadly enough, that the bulk of them
does have a faintest clue what kind od damage ESD can do to electronic
components. They just grap some parts together, power it on, try to
install some bloatware. And that's it.
Problem with ESD-damage is, that there is a fair chance that you wont
notice the damage for two or three years....
I know from Sun and IBM that all of their used parts serialnumbers are
tracked, all parts are tested before they are used or shipped to
customers. All applicable engineers are regulary re-trained considering
ESD and their manufacturing department has to follow ever ESD rule.
(Otherwise governemental departmens won't do business with them)
Even medium-sized companies have people who are completeli ESD-ignorant.
So for serious installations, either commerical-quality, or diy, if you
know what you're doing...
Hans |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ki4swy at kotbh.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:31 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
I have been running 1.4.17 since its release, and no kernal panics.
Before that I was running 1.4.13 without any kernal panics.
System Specs:
4 Core Xeon 5110 @ 1.6Ghz (two dual proc chips)
8 Gb Ram
400GB Raid 5 SAS Array
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Ira <ira at extrasensory.com>
Reply-To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion<asterisk-users at lists.digium.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:20:56 -0800
| Quote: | At 11:53 AM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
| Quote: | Apart from the fact asterisk 1.2 is in security maintenance
mode only and wont get any other bugfixes it will be ok.
Please consider using 1.4 as it's the official latest stable
version.
|
Although for some of us, or at least me, no version of 1.4 has run
for more than 72 hours before generating a kernel panic. I've tried
about 6 versions, the early ones were good for about 10 minutes, the
latest one lasted 3 days. Sadly I'm still stuck using the latest 1.2.
Ira
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
________________________________________________________________
Sent via the WebMail system at kotbh.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ira at extrasensory.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 1:57 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
At 11:33 PM 1/19/2008, you wrote:
| Quote: | PC's age and when they age, things tend to go wrong, particularly
when you upgrade software. Unusual crashes are usually the first
sign that something is going wrong.
|
Well, my experience is they work until they die and that's usually
the PS or HD. In that machine the HD and memory are new and I've
never seen a PS cause a problem like that. If not for the effort of
learning all the stuff I've forgotten and getting new licenses
because the network card is different, I'd just put in a slightly
newer machine sitting on the other side of the office.
| Quote: | To me, it sounds like you've put the money into many of the right
areas - segregating your voice and data networks, going with decent
phones and ensuring your power is reliable so it just seems a little
strange to go cheap on the actual server.
|
It's my house, the machine is only 4 years old or so and it was a
decent HP desktop at the time. It's so overkill for my needs it's not
even funny and 4 years is hardly old enough to be worrying about death.
| Quote: | It sounds like you've been pretty lucky with this machine - not all
desktop machines are going to be anywhere near that reliable.
|
Personally, almost every machine I've discarded for myself and
clients has been because they just got too slow. Except for one
client who still runs DOS on Netware 3.12 and his machines usually
get tossed because we can't get AT power supplies any more. Yes,
they die on occasion but this machine gives no indication there is
any problem with the hardware.
| Quote: | The big thing that server grade machines give you is better quality
of parts that have been extensively tested with a range of operating systems.
|
I'd buy the tested part, but quality of parts at this point I'd
probably argue with.
Ira |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt at venturevoip.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 5:59 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
William Stillwell (Ki4swy) wrote:
| Quote: | I have been running 1.4.17 since its release, and no kernal panics.
Before that I was running 1.4.13 without any kernal panics.
|
I was getting kernel panics from HPEC, but it was because I was using
the i386 binary and not the i686 one.
I called Digium, they logged in, sorted it out, and everything works
fine now.
- --
Kind Regards,
Matt Riddell
Director
_______________________________________________
http://www.venturevoip.com (Great new VoIP end to end solution)
http://www.venturevoip.com/news.php (Daily Asterisk News - html)
http://www.venturevoip.com/newrssfeed.php (Daily Asterisk News - rss)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHk9I5DQNt8rg0Kp4RAr2cAJ90nLPYTF171HAqGS0mkynDnXplbwCffVn9
ml1B2uVBnVmEbsterwsP0y4=
=kuDX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ira at extrasensory.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 6:10 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
At 02:59 PM 1/20/2008, you wrote:
| Quote: | I was getting kernel panics from HPEC, but it was because I was using
the i386 binary and not the i686 one.
I called Digium, they logged in, sorted it out, and everything works
fine now.
|
I wonder if that's my problem? I have a 1ghz Celeron and I think I'm
using the 686 build. Would that be the correct match?
Ira |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
michiel at vanbaak.info
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 6:23 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
On 15:10, Sun 20 Jan 08, Ira wrote:
| Quote: | At 02:59 PM 1/20/2008, you wrote:
| Quote: | I was getting kernel panics from HPEC, but it was because I was using
the i386 binary and not the i686 one.
I called Digium, they logged in, sorted it out, and everything works
fine now.
|
I wonder if that's my problem? I have a 1ghz Celeron and I think I'm
using the 686 build. Would that be the correct match?
Ira
|
To make sure what you are running issue an 'uname -a'
The Celeron is i686.
--
Michiel van Baak
michiel at vanbaak.eu
http://michiel.vanbaak.eu
GnuPG key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x71C946BD
"Why is it drug addicts and computer afficionados are both called users?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt at venturevoip.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 6:33 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Ira wrote:
| Quote: | At 02:59 PM 1/20/2008, you wrote:
| Quote: | I was getting kernel panics from HPEC, but it was because I was using
the i386 binary and not the i686 one.
I called Digium, they logged in, sorted it out, and everything works
fine now.
|
I wonder if that's my problem? I have a 1ghz Celeron and I think I'm
using the 686 build. Would that be the correct match?
|
Yeah I think so, but give Digium a yell and get them to log in and check
it out.
- --
Kind Regards,
Matt Riddell
Director
_______________________________________________
http://www.venturevoip.com (Great new VoIP end to end solution)
http://www.venturevoip.com/news.php (Daily Asterisk News - html)
http://www.venturevoip.com/newrssfeed.php (Daily Asterisk News - rss)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHk9piDQNt8rg0Kp4RAgrNAKCYo23Cvs8MvW2TxNAegOpFGY1ArACfe/d5
PUU6sPUbwNMpL5FrIgkoHzY=
=Txvo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ira at extrasensory.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:22 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
At 03:23 PM 1/20/2008, you wrote:
| Quote: | To make sure what you are running issue an 'uname -a'
The Celeron is i686.
|
It says some stuff followed by: i686 i686 i386
Ira |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tzafrir.cohen at xorco...
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:45 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts? |
|
|
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 12:23:06AM +0100, Michiel van Baak wrote:
| Quote: | On 15:10, Sun 20 Jan 08, Ira wrote:
| Quote: | At 02:59 PM 1/20/2008, you wrote:
| Quote: | I was getting kernel panics from HPEC, but it was because I was using
the i386 binary and not the i686 one.
I called Digium, they logged in, sorted it out, and everything works
fine now.
|
I wonder if that's my problem? I have a 1ghz Celeron and I think I'm
using the 686 build. Would that be the correct match?
Ira
|
To make sure what you are running issue an 'uname -a'
The Celeron is i686.
|
This tells you about the kernel, not about the CPU.
--
Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755 jabber:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
+972-50-7952406 mailto:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
http://www.xorcom.com iax:guest at local.xorcom.com/tzafrir |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Search
