[cisco-voip] CM 4.x memory recommendations

[Wes Sisk]

The CallManager service activation tool enforces most service dependences I
am aware of.  If you enable CM, it forces RisDC enabled.

/Wes

-----Original Message-----
From: Erick Bergquist [mailto:erickbe at yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 3:49 PM
To: Wes Sisk
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] CM 4.x memory recommendations


Wes,

Thanks. Do you know if there is a cisco doc that lists
what should be enabled/disabled when a server is
dedicated publisher?

--- Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com> wrote:
> RisDC should only be enabled if ccm is enabled.
> if ccm is disabled, risdc should be disabled.
>
> /Wes
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erick Bergquist [mailto:erickbe at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 12:27 PM
> To: Wes Sisk
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CM 4.x memory
> recommendations
>
>
> The RisDC service if i recall. I can check my
> records
> on this and reply back in a bit.
>
> --- Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com> wrote:
> > What process was spiking the CPU before you
> enabled
> > ccm and cti.
> >
> > Dedicated publisher implies just that, ccm and cti
> > should not be
> > running.  I'm pretty sure this is specifically
> > discussed in the SRND and
> > is certainly how we run test beds inside Cisco.
> >
> > /Wes
> >
> > Erick Bergquist wrote:
> >
> > >Ryan,
> > >
> > >Thanks for the email on this.
> > >
> > >Regarding the comments in the document, about the
> > >publisher having ccm.exe and cti.exe services
> > running
> > >if it is doing call processing. We have a client
> > who
> > >has a dedicated publisher and not doing call
> > >processing on 4.02aSR1 and their publisher was
> > spiking
> > >to 100% and crashing when the ccm.exe and cti.exe
> > >services were not running. Cisco TAC had told us
> > that
> > >those are required to run on dedicated publishers
> > not
> > >doing call processing and to not put the
> publisher
> > as
> > >part of a server group. Once we enabled those the
> > 100%
> > >spikes stopped, etc. The publisher wasn't part of
> a
> > >server group either when we had problems.
> > >
> > >Thats fine, but just asking as this document
> seems
> > to
> > >be misleading on that and want to understand the
> > right
> > >and correct way to do that.
> > >
> > >--- Ryan Ratliff <rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>Just posted...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>
>http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/products/sw/voicesw/ps556/
> > >
> > >
> > >>prod_bulletin0900aecd80284099.html
> > >>
> > >>-Ryan
> > >>
> > >>_______________________________________________
> > >>cisco-voip mailing list
> > >>cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> >
>
>>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> > >Do You Yahoo!?
> > >Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around
> > >http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >cisco-voip mailing list
> > >cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> >
> >https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com