Alex,
This should work for you isn't it ? But decrease the query performance (by
using like method) ...
But may be interresting...
Mysql:
[SELECT mask, srvc, url, src, dest, boxc FROM dlr WHERE smsc='SMSC-1' AND
ts='211205080007' and dest like CONCAT('%',SUBSTRING('number',-4));]
regards
Vincent
--
Telemaque - NICE
Service Technique
Tel : +33 4 93 97 71 64 (fax 68)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vincent CHAVANIS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <devel@kannel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] DLR with field_dst not supported in Mysql/Pgsql
All right alex, i will not waste your time anymore
on a topic that have been already discussed :)
Thanks,
Vincent
--
Telemaque - NICE
Service Technique
Tel : +33 4 93 97 71 64 (fax 68)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alexander Malysh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <devel@kannel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] DLR with field_dst not supported in Mysql/Pgsql
> Vincent CHAVANIS wrote:
>> Alex,
>>
>> Recently i had the case that a DLR were wrongly updated.
>>
>> 2005-12-21 08:00:11 [2436] [16] DEBUG: DLR[mysql]: Looking for DLR
>> smsc=SMSC-1, ts=211205080007, dst=<masked>, type=2
>> 2005-12-21 08:00:11 [2436] [16] DEBUG: sql: SELECT mask, srvc, url, src,
>> dest, boxc FROM dlr WHERE smsc='SMSC-1' AND ts='211205080007';
>> 2005-12-21 08:00:11 [2436] [16] DEBUG: sql: DELETE FROM dlr WHERE
>> smsc='SMSC-1' AND ts='211205080007' LIMIT 1;
>>
>> 2005-12-21 08:00:15 [2436] [16] DEBUG: DLR[mysql]: Looking for DLR
>> smsc=SMSC-1, ts=211205080007, dst=<masked>, type=1
>> 2005-12-21 08:00:15 [2436] [16] DEBUG: sql: SELECT mask, srvc, url, src,
>> dest, boxc FROM dlr WHERE smsc='SMSC-1' AND ts='211205080007';
>> 2005-12-21 08:00:15 [2436] [16] DEBUG: sql: DELETE FROM dlr WHERE
>> smsc='SMSC-1' AND ts='211205080007' LIMIT 1;
>>
>> On a hudge systems, ts are in many case the same as many MTs (on a same
>> SMSC).
>> Do you really think that most of DLR should be wrong just because of a few
>> SMSC thats are returning wrong ADC ?
>> IMHO, it does not break all existing installations as you may think, it will
>> just not found the DLR into the DB...
>> but i think this is really acceptable.
>
> it does break existing installations as you stated yourself. DLR will
> not be found... And IMO it's not acceptable.
>
> And again: please look in the archives for my patch for this issue. If
> you apply it, you will get working DLR for your installation and it does
> not break existing.
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> P.S. I find MNC's solution acceptable too but it need more user
> configuration.
>
>>
>> Vincent.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Alexander Malysh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: <devel@kannel.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 12:10 PM
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] DLR with field_dst not supported in Mysql/Pgsql
>>
>>
>>
>>>Dear Vincent,
>>>
>>>did you find the previous discussion about this issue? If not please
>>>find it in ML archive read carefully and then make your statements.
>>>
>>>The problem is simple. UCP/SMPP does not define how destination address
>>>should be returned in delivery report. It does not explicitely say: it
>>>_must_ be equal. So you have no right to say those SMPP/UCP servers are
>>>buggy (ok, I would say it too, but...). And we (developer) have no right
>>>to break existing installation w/o a good reason and yes I see good
>>>reason to use destination in select, update, delete but not so how you
>>>do it. Destination should be stripped for some chars at beginning and
>>>only then used in select/update/delete.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Alex
>>>
>>>P.S. Please also see my patch for this topic in archives.
>>>
>>>
>>>Vincent CHAVANIS wrote:
>>>
>>>>Dear,
>>>>
>>>>Alex i understand your point of view,but it's better to not found a DLR in
>>>>the DB than updating a wrong one... (safety)
>>>>It breaks compatibility with broken UCP servers that allow to change the
>>>>OAdC field, YES
>>>>But, many UCP servers does not allow this. SMSC should return the AdC as
>>>>mentionned in UCP 51
>>>>That's why i think that this feature should be implemented.
>>>>
>>>>regards
>>>>
>>>>Vincent
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Telemaque - NICE
>>>>Service Technique
>>>>Tel : +33 4 93 97 71 64 (fax 68)
>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "Alexander Malysh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>To: <devel@kannel.org>
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 11:33 AM
>>>>Subject: Re: [PATCH] DLR with field_dst not supported in Mysql/Pgsql
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Stipe,
>>>>>
>>>>>why did you commit this pacth w/o waiting a bit for comments?
>>>>>
>>>>>such patch was already discussed few times and we did not found solution
>>>>>yet. I'm -1 for this patch because it will break too many installations.
>>>>>For short explanation why -1: if you sent destination 00491234567 but
>>>>>SMSC returns 01234567 as destination (IIRC this is the case T-Mobile
>>>>>germany UCP server) then you will not find DLR in the DB. For a longer
>>>>>explannation seek in ML archives for discussion about it.
>>>>>
>>>>>Please revert it or I will do it.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>Alex
>>>>>
>>>>>Stipe Tolj wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Vincent CHAVANIS wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Dear,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I've noticed today that field_dst is not implemented in DLR for mysql
>>>>>>>and pgsql.
>>>>>>>If a DLR arrives with the same TS as another one on a same SMSC,
>>>>>>>kannel will not be able to update the correct one
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Here is a patch tested and in production status, maybe should be
>>>>>>>commited to CVS
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi Vincent,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>yep, ++1 here. Commited to CVS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>A kind request, please do not cross-post to both lists, and we'd prefer
>>>>>>'diff -u' format patches ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Stipe
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
