[SR-Users] Async module taking down our server
Brandon Armstead
brandon at cryy.com
Thu Jan 29 13:06:25 CET 2015
Why not just kill the call and have billing fix up for minimum duration occur during CDR creation? Does not make sense to delay Hangup just to meet minimum duration.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 28, 2015, at 5:37 PM, Will Ferrer <will.ferrer at switchsoft.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Daniel
>
> Yeah I am happy to be able to report the success. Thanks for everything as always!
>
> I hope you are well.
>
> Will
>
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 5:54 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> great that it was sorted out and it was not on Kamailio side :-)
>>
>> Also, glad to hear that async processing did increase capacity to handle more concurrent calls, even it was causing troubles to other applications ...
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>>> On 28/01/15 05:40, Will Ferrer wrote:
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> I wanted to give an update on this.
>>>
>>> My business partner that found the issue and has been monitoring the problem has tracked down the issue. It turns out that the features we implemented using the async module were leading to more calls going on con currently (as they were intended to) and this was causing and issue with voip monitor. So the issue was not with the Async module.
>>>
>>> All the best.
>>>
>>> Will Ferrer
>>>
>>> Switchsoft
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Will Ferrer <will.ferrer at switchsoft.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi All
>>>>
>>>> We are trying to use the async module to to delay sending a bye on from one end of the call to the other.
>>>>
>>>> We are using async_route(routename, seconds) to delay the WITHINDLG route. The idea is that in the future we want to be able to have our billing min duration enforced (though currently we are having issues with the dialog module that we are discussing in another thread).
>>>>
>>>> After running this on our deploy servers, the delays before sending on the byes get longer and longer, and then kamailio goes down. Then the receive udp buffer fills up.
>>>>
>>>> We tried it with both 4 and 400 async workers, and it made no difference.
>>>>
>>>> I am including a screen capture of the servers stats when this happens taken from voip monitor.
>>>>
>>>> Here are the relevant parts of the config:
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>> loadmodule "async.so"
>>>> ...
>>>> modparam("async", "workers", ASYNC_THREADS)
>>>> ...
>>>> request_route {
>>>> ...
>>>> route(DELAYED_BYE_STATIC);
>>>> ...
>>>> route[DELAYED_BYE_STATIC] {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG","route DELAYED_BYE_STATIC");
>>>> #!ifdef WITH_DELAYED_BYE_STATIC
>>>> if (is_method("BYE")) {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG","route DELAYED_BYE_STATIC, from self \n");
>>>> #if (from_uri == myself) {
>>>> if ((allow_trusted() || allow_source_address()) && from_uri == myself) {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG","route DELAYED_BYE_STATIC, Bye detected, from self \n");
>>>> send_reply("200", "OK");
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG","route DELAYED_BYE_STATIC, sent 200 about to sleep \n");
>>>> setflag(FLT_ACC); # do accounting ...
>>>> setflag(FLT_ACCFAILED); # ... even if the transaction fails
>>>> if (has_totag()) {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG","route DELAYED_BYE_STATIC, sleeping to WITHINDLG_DELAYED \n");
>>>> async_route("WITHINDLG_DELAYED", MIN_DURATION);
>>>> } else {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG","route DELAYED_BYE_STATIC, sleeping to WITHINDLG \n");
>>>> async_route("WITHINDLG", MIN_DURATION);
>>>> }
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG","route DELAYED_BYE_STATIC, slept\n");
>>>> exit;
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> #!endif
>>>> return;
>>>> }
>>>> ...
>>>> route[WITHINDLG_DELAYED] {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG", "route WITHINDLG_DELAYED: triggered \n");
>>>> $avp(was_delayed) = 1;
>>>> route(WITHINDLG);
>>>> }
>>>> ...
>>>> route[WITHINDLG] {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG", "route WITHINDLG: will -- DLG triggered, request method: $rm \n");
>>>> #!ifdef WITH_DISPATCHER
>>>> if(is_method("BYE|CANCEL")) {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG","route WITHINDLG: cancel or bye detected, request method: $rm \n");
>>>> #!ifdef WITH_DISPATCHER_LOAD_AWARE
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG","route WITHINDLG: running ds_load_update, request method: $rm \n");
>>>> ds_load_update();
>>>> #dlg_get ("$ci","$ft","$tt");
>>>> #dlg_bye ("all");
>>>> #!endif
>>>> }
>>>> #!endif
>>>>
>>>> if (has_totag() || $avp(was_delayed) == 1) {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG", "route WITHINDLG: will -- DLG has totag or was_delayed: $avp(was_delayed) \n");
>>>> # sequential request withing a dialog should
>>>> # take the path determined by record-routing
>>>> if (loose_route()) {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG", "route WITHINDLG: will -- DLG has loose route \n");
>>>> route(DLGURI);
>>>> if (is_method("BYE")) {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG","route WITHINDLG: BYE detected");
>>>> setflag(FLT_ACC); # do accounting ...
>>>> setflag(FLT_ACCFAILED); # ... even if the transaction fails
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG","route WITHINDLG: ACC flag set");
>>>>
>>>> }
>>>> else if ( is_method("ACK") ) {
>>>> # ACK is forwarded statelessy
>>>> route(NATMANAGE);
>>>> }
>>>> else if ( is_method("NOTIFY") ) {
>>>> # Add Record-Route for in-dialog NOTIFY as per RFC 6665.
>>>> record_route();
>>>> }
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG", "route WITHINDLG: will -- DLG RELAY 1\n");
>>>> route(RELAY);
>>>> } else {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG", "route WITHINDLG: will -- DLG else \n");
>>>> if (is_method("SUBSCRIBE") && uri == myself) {
>>>> # in-dialog subscribe requests
>>>> route(PRESENCE);
>>>> exit;
>>>> }
>>>> if ( is_method("ACK") ) {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG", "route WITHINDLG: will -- DLG is ack \n");
>>>> if ( t_check_trans() ) {
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG", "route WITHINDLG: will -- DLG t_check_trans \n");
>>>> # no loose-route, but stateful ACK;
>>>> # must be an ACK after a 487
>>>> # or e.g. 404 from upstream server
>>>> xlog("L_DEBUG", "route WITHINDLG: will -- DLG RELAY 2\n");
>>>> route(RELAY);
>>>> exit;
>>>> } else {
>>>> # ACK without matching transaction ... ignore and discard
>>>> exit;
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> sl_send_reply("404","Not here");
>>>> }
>>>> exit;
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does any one know if this is a bug or a leak with in the async module, or perhaps something I am doing in my config?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance for an assistance you can offer me.
>>>>
>>>> All the best.
>>>>
>>>> Will Ferrer
>>>> Switchsoft
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
>>> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
>>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>>
>> --
>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>> http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
>> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20150129/f9cd749b/attachment.html>
More information about the sr-users
mailing list