[Serdev] Re: [Serusers] Are there efforts to multi-thread SER?

[Jiri Kuthan]

Greger is right, we do multi-process preforking, we don't do multithreading.
That's for historical reasons. When the first line of SER was being written,
we had a lengthy debate on that and eventually code on CVS submitted by Andrei
closed the discussion :-)

-jiri

At 19:52 02/05/2007, Greger Viken Teigre wrote:
>Hi Eric,
>I copy the serdev mailing list as the people you need to discuss this with primarily read that list and not always follow serusers closely.
>
>I'm not an expert, but I'll give you some pointers to recent activities that may shed some light on the issue.
>
>As you probably know, SER spawns multiple processes, a set of workers for each protocol it listens on (udp,tcp,tls) and shared memory is used. I know there has 
>been some work on ensuring efficiency with processes running across processors, but don't know the details.
>
>AFAIK, there has been no attempt at doing also multi-threading, due to the complexity of multi-threading and multi-processes in the same app. If you search 
>from iptel.org/listsearch (I think), you will find a quite recent thread discussing the process model in the perspective of openims. The basic discussion was 
>around the lack of ability to spawn processes dynamically from a module. Dragos and Andrei, I think, are names to look for.
>
>Also, SER has an interface that exposes the sip stack to external applications like sems. It has today a single process limitation. Look for Bogan Pintea's 
>Praha user group meeting presentation at iptel.org.
>
>Except from that, SER is very focused on efficiency and I hope others on serdev can follow up. It will be interesting to hear your opinions; your email address 
>signals some credebility on the topic ;-)
>g-)
>
>------- Original message -------
>From: Heaton, Eric D <eric.d.heaton at intel.com>
>Sent: 2.5.'07,  9:52
>
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> Are there any efforts within the community here to multithread any
>> aspect of the SER project (i.e. either in the "core" functionality, or
>> over any of the plug-ins), for example, to have it run more efficiently,
>> provide for more bandwidth, etc. on a multi-core CPU?  I'm starting to
>> look into the topic myself, and don't want to duplicate work; at the
>> least, I'd want to add to it!
>> 
>> Thanks in advance. 
>>  
>>   -- Eric 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Serusers mailing list
>> Serusers at lists.iptel.org
>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>
>_______________________________________________
>Serdev mailing list
>Serdev at lists.iptel.org
>http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev



--
Jiri Kuthan            http://iptel.org/~jiri/