On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 5:00 PM, Tilghman Lesher < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 July 2008 14:06:56 Thameem Ansari wrote: > > There is no performance impact if you use AGI or DeadAGI. > > There is a performance impact, in terms of the time it takes for > the process to start up. It may be measured in fractions of a second, > but there certainly is a performance penalty. It is not zero. > Do you mean they both have the same penalty or is one worse than the other? > > > The only > > difference is, if you use AGI it will not continue executing the dialplan > > if the calling party hangsup the call. DeadAgi, will continue executing > the > > dialplan and its upto the applications responsibility to hangup the > > channel. So, the application should be aggressive enough to hangup the > > channel to avoid wrong cdr durations. > > DeadAGI is not recommended and is not supported for channels which are > not already hungup (and invoked from the "h" extension in the dialplan). > Not recommended and not supported would imply it doesn't work. I think it works so who doesn't support it and why not? > > -- > Tilghman > >
_______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- AstriCon 2008 - September 22 - 25 Phoenix, Arizona Register Now: http://www.astricon.net asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
