Re: Multi record sending patch

2013/7/18 Rene Kluwen <[email protected]>

> Also gw_sql_save_msg could then be adapted to a multi-record insert.****
>
> Which also gives a big performance boost on a large number of messages.***
> *
>
> This is getting interesting.****
>
> ** **
>
> Spameden: Do you have any insights about how Alejandro’s current patch
> compares to an unpatched sqlbox in terms of performance?
>

I don't have exact numbers, but I've been using sqlbox with Alejandro's
patch with limit-per-cycle = 50 for quite a while and never had problems
with MySQL bottlenecks.

I'd say If you have more than 10k messages in a queue and have a busy MySQL
installation (i.e. have simultaneous about 100 users on your website) it
would definitely give you a boost.

Althrough I'm also deleting old messages from sent_sms table and
OPTIMIZE'ing it from time to time but still ..


> ****
>
> ** **
>
> == Rene****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* spameden [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* donderdag 18 juli 2013 17:57
>
> *To:* Rene Kluwen
> *Cc:* Alejandro Guerrieri; kannel_dev_mailinglist [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: Multi record sending patch****
>
> ** **
>
> I will wait for your revised patch!
>
> currently I'm using Alejandro's patch but on outdated r4968 kannel/sqlbox.
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> 2013/7/18 Rene Kluwen <[email protected]>****
>
> I could come up with a re-patch. Where the sqlbox_id’s are returned in a
> separate list.****
>
> This way, performance can even be boosted by using only 1 delete
> statement: DELETE FROM <send_sms_table> WHERE sqlbox_id in (id1, id2, id3,
> etc….)****
>
>  ****
>
> What do you think?****
>
>  ****
>
> == Rene****
>
>  ****
>
> *From:* spameden [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* donderdag 18 juli 2013 17:24
> *To:* Rene Kluwen
> *Cc:* Alejandro Guerrieri; kannel_dev_mailinglist [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: Multi record sending patch****
>
>  ****
>
> +1 for this patch to be included!****
>
> the only thing is sqlbox deletes record from the database before its sent
> to the bearerbox, so if sqlbox crashes at this point some messages could be
> lost.****
>
>  ****
>
> 2013/7/18 Rene Kluwen <[email protected]>****
>
> Hello Alejandro,****
>
>  ****
>
> I found this patch and I consider it useful enough to include in sqlbox
> trunk.****
>
> Is this the latest version? And is it tested well?****
>
>  ****
>
> Maybe you have a diff against current trunk.****
>
>  ****
>
> == Rene****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>