Jump to: navigation, search

Cachable VoiceXML Content Test Cases

In the following test cases, maximum capacity was achieved within the constraints of specific thresholds. However, the system was also tested beyond the recommended capacity to determine the extent of performance degradation.

GVP can cache internal, compiled VoiceXML objects. Caching VoiceXML objects saves a significant amount of compilation time, resulting in less CPU usage. The VoiceXML_App1 application (see VoiceXML Application Profiles) was used for the test case in Figure: Port Density vs. CPU (VoiceXML_App2) and was based on the peak capacity indicated in Table: GVP VOIP VXML/CCXML Capacity Testing.

Port Density vs. CPU (VoiceXML_App1)

The more complex the VoiceXML content, the greater the benefit of having cachable content. The test case in Figure: Port Density vs. CPU (VoiceXML_App2) (below) is similar to the one in Figure: Port Density vs. CPU (VoiceXML_App1) (above), except that the more complex VoiceXML_App2 application was used (see VoiceXML Application Profiles).

Port Density vs. CPU (VoiceXML_App2)

In Figure: Port Density vs. CPU (VoiceXML_App1) and Figure: PD vs. CPU (VoiceXML_App2), the processing of cachable and non-cachable content are compared with the Media Control Platform using the same level of CPU consumption for both applications. The following results show the benefits of using cachable content:

CPU Consumption—Media Control Platform at peak capacity:

  • 15% less consumption than non-cached content using VoiceXML_App1.
  • ~30% less consumption than non-cached content using VoiceXML_App2.

Port Density—CPU consumption at same level for both applications:

  • ~30-35% greater than non-cached content using VoiceXML_App1.
  • ~50% greater than non-cached content using VoiceXML_App2.

top | toc

Feedback

Comment on this article:

blog comments powered by Disqus
This page was last modified on 25 September 2017, at 05:29.