Better check against the sources. What is printed in the logs (Created &
destroyed) are malloc operations, not thread_create or join. If you need to
convince yourself, there are 2 numbers in brackets in front of each log
message. The first one is pid, the second one is thread id. Thread id does
not change when creating clients. /bin/false is still another process,
granted with a lighter shell to startup. Compare that with a malloc.
Also bear in mind that if you change the sources you branch off and you may
have to manually merge in all future updates.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: "dorian" <doria...@o2.pl>
To: "Alejandro Guerrieri" <alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com>
Cc: <users@kannel.org>
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: sms - dlr bounding
Well. I know the difference between fork and pthread_create.
Anyway the http client work (even if it is thread not a process) is
waste of time for me.
Additionally I am forced to have working http server also which also do
a silly work for me (taking CPU time and RAM).
I am trying to find out the way to have dlr report but not to be forced
to run http server since dlr reply is handled with sqlbox and it is
enough for me.
(on condition that I am able to bound sms with dlr)
Dorian,
Kannel uses threads. It doesn't fork.
There's a _huge_ difference in terms of cost between a thread and fork.
Using "exec" is a very bad idea in terms of performance and security.
Regards,
Alex
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 10:59 AM, dorian <doria...@o2.pl
<mailto:doria...@o2.pl>> wrote:
1. See DEBUG line. Even if it is thread it takes time and RAM to
create,
the thread running take time preparing http request, my http server
waste time to handle the request etc.
2. I need dlr feedback
> On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 09:26, dorian wrote:
>
>> Right.
>> But for http connection the kannel's clients is forked (at least it
>> looks like according to the logs: 'DEBUG: HTTP: Creating
HTTPClient').
>> Such fork is almost the same as exec'ing external process.
>>
>
> How do you know it is fork?
> It could be thread or even simple function call.
>
>
>> So I prefer exec my script rather than kannel's http client.
This way
>> the are no resources consumed by http server and the time
needed for
>> http request compose and parse is saved.
>>
>> In case of sms reception I have a chance to do that - there is
"exec"
>> config keyword.
>> But dlr has to be handled via http.
>>
>> What is more - since sqlbox do "the database registration"
without my
>> intervention I do not need any drl handler.
>> But not to have errors in kannel log I am forced to use http
server.
>>
>> And having similar "exec" config parameter against dlr-url I
could try
>> to use dummy script like "/bin/false" or something like this
which for
>> sure would be faster.
>>
>
> Better solution could be not to request delivery report when sending
> message and then there is no need for dlr handling at all.
>
>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The "exec" script is another process started each time and is more
>>> expensive than attempting to fetch a dlr-url. The http server,
>>> initially takes up some resources (memory) but it remains
constant and
>>> CPU utilization is overall lower.
>>>
>>> That's the whole purpose of the dlr-url. To get your dlrs in a
databse
>>> in the format that you want.
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Nikos
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "dorian" <doria...@o2.pl
<mailto:doria...@o2.pl>>
>>> To: "Alvaro Cornejo" <cornejo.alv...@gmail.com
<mailto:cornejo.alv...@gmail.com>>
>>> Cc: <users@kannel.org <mailto:users@kannel.org>>
>>> Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 1:06 AM
>>> Subject: Re: sms - dlr bounding
>>>
>>>
>>> There is nothing magical in sqlbox.
>>> It sits between bearerbox and smsbox and it just records data
in the
>>> database.
>>> Each message = 1 record in the table independetly if the
message is
>>> outgoing sms (MT) , incoming sms (MO) or delivery report.
>>> It is nice and simple way to have a full history of communication.
>>>
>>> So I do not need any extra dlr message handling - a record in the
>>> database if enough for me.
>>> But only on condition that it would be possible to recognize
which dlr
>>> record corresponds to the record describing sent sms.
>>>
>>> On the other hand the method with dlr-url _requires_ the
existence of
>>> the url if I want to avoid stupid log entries.
>>>
>>> What is more kannel unnecessarily runs the http client to make
dlr-url
>>> fetch. It is waste of CPU time RAM usage etc.
>>>
>>> In case of sms receiving there is a "exec" entry (sms-service)
which
>>> allows me to forget about http protocol and get all data
directly with
>>> my shell script.
>>> This way I would not need any working http server (which takes
next
>>> resourses) but dlr-url requires such server.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> How it works is, once kannel receives a dlr, it matches
against its
>>>> dlr database, if got a macth, it then calls your own dlr-url to
>>>> trigger your own application so you can reccord the status and do
>>>> whatever you want with it. If the dlr is for a final status, the
>>>> kannel deletes that dlr reccord.
>>>>
>>>> With sqlbox, I don't know how dlrs exactly works. Have you
tried to
>>>> put in your dlr-url your own id only? does kannel complains
that it is
>>>> not a valid url ?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>>>
>>>> EnvΞ½e y Reciba Datos y mensajes de Texto (SMS) hacia y desde
cualquier
>>>> celular y Nextel
>>>> en el Per�, Mιxico y en mas de 180 paises. Use aplicaciones 2
vias via
>>>> SMS y GPRS online
>>>> Visitenos en www.perusms.NET
<http://www.perusms.NET> www.smsglobal.com.mx
<http://www.smsglobal.com.mx> y
>>>> www.pravcom.com <http://www.pravcom.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2010/9/16 dorian <doria...@o2.pl <mailto:doria...@o2.pl>>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks a lot for reply.
>>>>>
>>>>> Using the sqlbox I see now the MT and DLR record in the
database which
>>>>> has the same 'dlr_url' field with my id and it looks like the
>>>>> problem is
>>>>> solved.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway is it the only solution?
>>>>>
>>>>> The 'dlr_url' field contains the whole http link which for me is
>>>>> completely useless and is needlessly long as the only sms id is
>>>>> interesting.
>>>>>
>>>>> Next subject is that having database I do not need to fire
up any http
>>>>> url when delivery report is sent back. It waste of CPU time
only.
>>>>> So I am looking for something which could give me
same/similar results
>>>>> in database without necessity of creating dlr http site Such
site is
>>>>> completely useless for me.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> you need to add your own different id to each of your
messages in the
>>>>>> dlr-url you send with the message.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>>>>>
>>>>>> EnvΞ½e y Reciba Datos y mensajes de Texto (SMS) hacia y
desde cualquier
>>>>>> celular y Nextel
>>>>>> en el Per�, Mιxico y en mas de 180 paises. Use aplicaciones
2 vias via
>>>>>> SMS y GPRS online
>>>>>> Visitenos en www.perusms.NET
<http://www.perusms.NET> www.smsglobal.com.mx
<http://www.smsglobal.com.mx> y
>>>>>> www.pravcom.com <http://www.pravcom.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2010/9/16 dorian <doria...@o2.pl <mailto:doria...@o2.pl>>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's assume that I am sending 3 sms'es (MTs) to switched off
>>>>>>> terminal.
>>>>>>> Next the terminal is switched on.
>>>>>>> Let's assume the only 2 of them are delivered.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The (maybe stupid) question is:
>>>>>>> how to find out which dlr report refers to which sms sent?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I cannot find a "key" which could be used to "bind" dlr report
>>>>>>> with sms
>>>>>>> as a result I don't know how to detect which sms has been
discarded.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am using bearerbox-sqlbox-smsbox with CIMD2 smsc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> Dorian
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
