[SR-Users] rtpengine in stateless kamailio

[Yuriy Gorlichenko]

Hi Daniel! thx for the reply too!
Richard was correct about hash table (I tried a couple of experiments)
So it i not a Leak in bug point of view but behavior that gives growing
hash of rtpengine module

If I looking at the kamcmd rtpengine.get_hash_total with watch every second
- I see it growing
Also if I disabling rtpengine_<> calling -I see shmem is not growing at all

So for now question only how to reset/not use/drop hash table for the
rtpengine modue

ср, 2 янв. 2019 г. в 17:32, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com>:

> Hello,
>
> to see the source of the leak in shared memory, the best is to generate
> usage summary.
>
> First set memlog lower than debug parameter, you can do in the
> kamailio.cfg or via rpc:
>
> kamcmd cfg.set_now_int core memlog 1
>
> The above sets memlog to 1, so choose a value lower than what you have for
> debug.
>
> The generate the summary via rpc:
>
> kamcmd corex.shm_summary
>
> Look in syslog for printed messages related to use of shared memory.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 2:45 PM Richard Fuchs <rfuchs at sipwise.com> wrote:
>
>> On 02/01/2019 07.45, Yuriy Gorlichenko wrote:
>> > Hi!
>> > Happy new year to all!!!
>> >
>> > Look like I am first in this year wit hthe questions in this list :-).
>> >
>> > I'm using stateless kamailio and RTPengnine to build some kind of the
>> > stateless cluster
>> > I found that kamailio keeps some data  in the SHMEM in case of using
>> > RTPengine module even if it is not a rtpengine_manage function but
>> > offer/answer/delete
>> >
>> > In this case if INVITE (offer) handled by 1-st kamailio in my cluster,
>> > and BYE/CANCEL handled by second kamailio in the cluster - 1-st
>> > kamailio (which has been used for offer) will hase kinda internal
>> > "memory leak" (in SHMEM it never decrased)
>> >
>> > At the rtpengine module source I found some transation dependencies
>> > for the rtpengine_manage function but did not find for the
>> > offer/answer/delete
>> > I supposed these 3 functions just sending requests to the rtpnegine
>> > with keys and not storing anything
>> >
>> > So my question - is it possible to use RTPengine module in stateless
>> > way to avoid internal "memory leak" because in my scenario I have big
>> > chance never receive  BYE/CANCEL on the machine that started handle
>> > particular call
>>
>>
>> This is probably the module-internal hash table that is used to make
>> sure that signalling relating to the same call is always sent to the
>> same rtpengine instance. This hash table does have a configurable
>> timeout value (`hash_table_tout`, defaults to 1 hour), which makes it
>> possible to still use it in a way you've described. However, from the
>> code it's my understanding that timed out hash table entries are only
>> deleted when they're encountered during processing, so it's not entirely
>> deterministic that old entries are always deleted after they've timed
>> out. The RPC command `rtpengine.get_hash_total` can be used to inspect
>> the current size of the hash table.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
>> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
>> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
> http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
> _______________________________________________
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20190102/0c18d691/attachment.html>