> DynExtenDB is absolutely the wrong way to deal with dynamic extensions > in Asterisk. Yes, it may function, but it will not scale.
That is the problem... isn't scalable, doesn't fit for me. > a reload doesn't drop any service...I asterisk -rx 'reload' production > boxes dozens of times per day. In fact, yesterday Brian teach me the -rx. I was thinking in something like this: /etc/rc.d/init.d/asterisk reload Stupid, ah? Since today, I'm using -rx "extensions reload" in php scripts. > Karl Putland and myself worked on a MySQL based switch, but stopped > working on it because we had no real motivation behind our work and we > never decided to really pester 'the man' about getting answers to our > (mainly Karl's) questions. Ok, I agree with you, present implementation of Asterisk is excellent, but would be more comfortable (for many people, and me) to handle the content of extensions.conf in mysql. I believe that it is good idea gives to Asterisk all possible features. > > If you have the proper motivation, I'm sure Karl or myself could free > ourselves up to solve those problems that we gave up so easily on before. I still thinking that sql services maybe the definitive solution to all routing stuff. I'm not a C wizard, but I think that I could help. At least in some points. :) > > > Jeremy McNamara > Thanks, Jeremy. Gus _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
