Hi, Thanks for the response. I deleted that line by mistake when I was removing commented-out lines before posting.
BR, Jason 2010/8/26 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > 1) You should leave an empty line between group definitions (smsbox, > smsbox-route). > > 2) Your bb log is very short to be of any use. However, you can see SMS > requeing going on, in which case priority queues are not observed. If you > get SMS in the delayed queue, you understand that they get out of order, > since kannel is opportunistic and sends as many SMS as it can, without > waiting for the delayed ones to get in order. > > BR, > Nikos > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Mule" <[email protected]> > To: "Rene Kluwen" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 11:03 AM > Subject: Re: Kannel queue with same priority is unpredictable > > >> Sorry. For completeness, I have attached the config file used for the >> test. Also, I will add an interesting snippet from the bearerbox log >> because the file is huge (logging was set to DEBUG): >> ... >> 2010-08-25 11:55:26 [25528] [8] DEBUG: sms_router: handling message >> (0xacd5950 vs 0xacd5950) >> 2010-08-25 11:55:26 [25528] [8] DEBUG: re-queing SMS not-yet-to-be resent >> 2010-08-25 11:55:26 [25528] [8] DEBUG: sms_router: handling message >> (0xacd5950 vs 0xacd5950) >> 2010-08-25 11:55:26 [25528] [8] DEBUG: re-queing SMS not-yet-to-be resent >> 2010-08-25 11:55:26 [25528] [8] DEBUG: sms_router: time to sleep 60.00 >> secs. >> 2010-08-25 11:55:26 [25528] [8] DEBUG: sms_router: gwlist_len = 1 >> 2010-08-25 11:55:26 [25528] [8] DEBUG: sms_router: handling message >> (0xacd5950 vs 0xacd5950) >> 2010-08-25 11:55:26 [25528] [8] DEBUG: re-queing SMS not-yet-to-be resent >> 2010-08-25 11:55:26 [25528] [8] DEBUG: sms_router: handling message >> (0xacd5950 vs 0xacd5950) >> 2010-08-25 11:55:26 [25528] [8] DEBUG: re-queing SMS not-yet-to-be resent >> 2010-08-25 11:55:26 [25528] [8] DEBUG: sms_router: time to sleep 60.00 >> secs. >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [11] DEBUG: send_msg: sending msg to boxc: >> <smsbox0> >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [11] DEBUG: boxc_sender: sent message to >> <127.0.0.1> >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [10] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: got ack >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [11] DEBUG: send_msg: sending msg to boxc: >> <smsbox0> >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [11] DEBUG: boxc_sender: sent message to >> <127.0.0.1> >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [10] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: got ack >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [11] DEBUG: send_msg: sending msg to boxc: >> <smsbox0> >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [11] DEBUG: boxc_sender: sent message to >> <127.0.0.1> >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [10] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: got ack >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [11] DEBUG: send_msg: sending msg to boxc: >> <smsbox0> >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [11] DEBUG: boxc_sender: sent message to >> <127.0.0.1> >> 2010-08-25 11:55:30 [25528] [10] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: got ack >> ... >> >> Nikos: Don't worry. I used a simulator and no actual messages were sent >> out. >> >> BR, >> Jason >> >> On 26 August 2010 00:12, Rene Kluwen <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> If you send all of those messages at once, I don't know how priority >>> queues >>> behave. >>> If priority is the same and the time that messages are sent are within >>> the >>> same second. What do priority queues do? >>> >>> == Rene >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >>> Behalf >>> Of Nikos Balkanas >>> Sent: Wednesday, 25 August, 2010 21:47 >>> To: Jason Mule >>> Cc: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: Kannel queue with same priority is unpredictable >>> >>> Wow! Did you sent all these through a real SMSc? It must have costed a >>> bundle. Use fakesmpp for the tests to avoid charges. >>> Will need also relevant bb logs and your configuration. >>> >>> BR, >>> Nikos >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Jason Mule >>> To: Nikos Balkanas >>> Cc: Alejandro Guerrieri ; [email protected] >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 4:19 PM >>> Subject: Re: Kannel queue with same priority is unpredictable >>> >>> >>> I have reproduced this by sending 10000 messages in 2 sets to simulate a >>> large MT-Push. Please note the sequence of messages in >>> 'smsboxaccess0.log' >>> and compare this to 'access.log'. Messages with the string 'Message 2' >>> were >>> sent after messages with the string 'Message 1'. >>> >>> >>> 2010/8/25 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> >>> >>> And i am saying the same thing to you: >>> >>> Please share relevant log entries demonstrating this. >>> >>> BR, >>> Nikos >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Mule" <[email protected]> >>> To: "Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]> >>> Cc: "Alejandro Guerrieri" <[email protected]>; >>> <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 4:09 PM >>> >>> Subject: Re: Kannel queue with same priority is unpredictable >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have observed that as long as there are messages in the store file >>> en route to the SMSC, newer MTs to Kannel will be sent out before the >>> bunch of messages in the store file. Priority is not changed for the >>> newer messages and the messages are not retries. This is probably what >>> the OP was referring to. >>> >>> 2010/7/20 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]>: >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> It turns that priority queue in kannel is dtermined both by SMS priority >>> and >>> age of sms. I.e. if 2 sms have the same priority, the older one gets the >>> call (FIFO). It is also implemented only in SMPP, EMI & at. >>> >>> BR, >>> Nikos >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: Alejandro Guerrieri >>> To: Nikos Balkanas >>> Cc: Waqas Farooq ; [email protected] >>> Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:11 PM >>> Subject: Re: Kannel queue with same priority is unpredictable >>> >>> >>> That's not correct. At least on SVN for a good time now, Kannel honors >>> priorities, being 3 the highest and 0 the lowest. That means that if you >>> have a big queue of priority-1 messages and send one priority-2 or 3 >>> message, it will get delivered before the rest of the queue. >>> >>> >>> The priority is also passed to the SMSC by means of SMPP's priority flag, >>> but afaik most carriers ignore ESME settings for priority so do not >>> expect >>> it to work. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> >>> Alex >>> >>> >>> 2010/7/20 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Priority is not used by kannel. It is part of the SMPP spec and is passed >>> to >>> receiving SMSc. Queue is FIFO, subject to constraints like >>> sms-resend-freq >>> and sms-resend-retry. If in doubt check store-queue from http admin. >>> >>> BR, >>> Nikos >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: Waqas Farooq >>> To: [email protected] >>> Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 11:48 AM >>> Subject: Kannel queue with same priority is unpredictable >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I have a very large queue with all the messages in the queue and the new >>> incoming messages from the smsbox are with the same priority. The problem >>> is >>> that new messages get delivered earlier than the ones already queued. I >>> have >>> no idea what sort of queue it is? Is it a FIFO queue or the kannel just >>> tries to send the messages from the smsbox directly if possible and if >>> not >>> then the message is queued? Please note that all the messages are at the >>> same priority! >>> >>> Any help will be highly appreciated! >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Waqas >>> >>> >>> >>> Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now. >> > >
