For the newbies on the list... THIS IS THE WAY TO ASK A QUESTION. This shows forethought and a proof that Brent thought about the problem before askeing a question.
On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 12:17, Brent Franks wrote: > I know this has been covered before, but could someone please explain the > benefits to starting asterisk various ways. I am partly posting this too, > to see if my assumptions are correct. > > Is call quality affected by starting it differently? > My belief is no. Regardless of how you start it, quality will be > the same... Correct? Correct. Most interfaces are digital and unless a filter was introduced it would sound exactly the same. Also while running as root, there isn't any niceness problems either. > So far, I have used: > > asterisk -vvvgnc > If you are logged into a TTY on the physical machine, > starting this way, is no problem. However, if you start Asterisk like > this remotely, once the session is killed, the asterisk program dies. > Makes sense... This is good for temporary runs where you want to see all the startup messages to debug a run. > safe_asterisk > Starting like this, will use the Asterisk startup script > provided by the CVS, located in sbin. This is a good way to start > remotely. No? I think I use a version of that script. I also use this script in an init.d script to start asterisk as it restarts asterisk if it crashes. > screen -d -m asterisk -vvvvgnc > Just another way to start remotely? Used to use this, but I prefer the safe_asterisk method. It is possible for you to forget to start screen and end up with asterisk crashing as ou try and leave. > So basically, they all do the same thing. Complexity is introduced only > when you want to auto-start asterisk on bootup. You would want to use > screen for this..? As I mentioned, safe_asterisk is what you want here. It takes care of many problems for you. > Any thing I have overlooked, please post to the list. All of the other > posts right now all point to personal opinions as to which is best. > Technically speaking though, from a call quality standpoint, there should > be 0 difference? Call quality should always be equal. The only thing outside of opinion is that safe_asterisk handles crashes well. If it is the same as what I have been using, it even emails you when it crashes and tells you where the core is. Really nice. -- Steven Critchfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
