[Spce-user] virtualizing sip:provider CE

[Marek Červenka]

hi,
can you share info about your virtualization? versions?
can you share your test-suite ?

marek

Dne 17.5.2016 v 16:31 Andreas Granig napsal(a):
> Hi,
>
> My latest performance tests on a Dell R320 (4 cores @2.2GHz) with a pair
> of PRO as only VMs on that host and 1 vCPU per host with 8GB RAM shows
> that we top out at around 15 regs/sec and 10 calls/sec, with the CPU
> being 100% utilized. IO is not a problem in this setup, iowait is pretty
> much 0 with the disk utilization maxing out at ~50% in peaks.
>
> The number of regs it can do without calls is somewhere around 80
> regs/sec, but if you add some calls, it degrades quite quickly.
>
> Whether or not it's still sufficient depends on your number of
> subscribers you plan to put onto one VM, and their typical Expiration
> time for registers. All in all it could still easily do ~10k subscribers
> with a 1 hour re-registration rate, where you'd end up with ~1800
> concurrent calls at 10calls/sec. Not too bad for 1 vCPU. Your mileage
> might vary though.
>
> As a comparison, on the same server in bare metal (4 cores @2.2GHz at
> 32GB RAM) you can do 250 regs/sec with 50 calls/sec without issues.
>
> Andreas
>
>
>
> On 05/17/2016 01:22 PM, Alex Lutay wrote:
>> Dear Stephen,
>>
>> This is super to hear you trust Sipwise NGCP as a basement for your own
>> company! In short there is no strict limitations to run on
>> virtual environment. While there some known minor issue there, like
>> sems eats ~5% CPU when doing nothing (on polling new sip packats), etc.
>>
>> Sure the hardware and software you choose for virtualisation is very
>> important. The IO speed and latency is always a problem of any virtual
>> env. Also VM neighbours sitting on the same hardware can create lack of
>> IO in the most unexpected moment. So, be careful with sharing hardware
>> with other VMs. NGCP relies on IO a lot.
>>
>> For the high performance and high availability we recommend you to try
>> our PRO solution. It guarantees 50 cps rate providing high availability
>> for already established calls. Feel free to contact sales at sipwise.com
>> for more information.
>>
>> In the same time please share your experience with SPCE in virtual
>> environment. We see the good theoretical possibilities there.
>>
>> Thank you!
>>
>> On 05/17/2016 05:20 AM, Stephen Donovan wrote:
>>> I’ve been down this road before with limited success…however…I’m now in
>>> a position where I have a lot more resources to do things right at my
>>> disposal.  Is it still recommended that I run spce bare metal..or is
>>> virtualization an option?  Any bottlenecks I should be looking at ?
>>> storage latency?...what about running on an array of SSDs vs spinning
>>> disks… my main storage system is consumer grade 7200rpm drives.  I can
>>> put together a set of 15k rpm SAS drives or SSDs easily. My big idea is
>>> high availability.  I have an opportunity to set up a test environment
>>> that can easily be moved between bare metal and vm for testing.
>>>
>>> Some (fuzzy) memories from a few years ago:
>>>
>>> SPCE seemed to do okay running as a VM on xenserver until we reached a
>>> certain threshold of concurrent calls, I don’t remember that number..but
>>> it wasn’t very big.  It seemed that IO wait was climbing at times,
>>> causing call processing issues.  The storage system in question was a
>>> ZFS RAID Z2 array comprised of 7200rpm desktop class drives that were
>>> not the fastest in the world by far.  It was at that time I decided to
>>> move back to bare metal and not look back.
>>>
>>> Now that I have my own company, I’m again looking at virtualization as
>>> an option for high(er) availability being that a single hardware failure
>>> will not take the infrastructure down.
>>>
>>> What amount of concurrent calls and/or calls per second could I expect
>>> to process given a certain amount of hardware?
>>>
>>> The physical hosts in question will be dell R610 boxes with 2x xeon
>>> x5550, 32GB RAM.  I plan to only run voice servers on this platform,
>>> I’ll have another resource pool for other workloads.
>>>
>>> Since my last experience, xenserver has been greatly improved, as I’m
>>> experiencing running most of my other servers on it at the current time.
>>>
>>> If it’s not a good idea, tell me so, I’ll  go another way, I’m looking
>>> for experiences.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Spce-user mailing list
> Spce-user at lists.sipwise.com
> https://lists.sipwise.com/listinfo/spce-user


-- 
---------------------------------------
Marek Cervenka
=======================================

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sipwise.com/pipermail/spce-user_lists.sipwise.com/attachments/20160518/5e167ff0/attachment-0001.html>