[OpenSIPS-Devel] [RELEASES] Planing OpenSIPS 1.9.0 major release

Ryan Bullock rrb3942 at gmail.com
Mon Oct 29 21:39:50 CET 2012


Hey Bogdan,

I came across the insert buffer problem with db_virtual when I was testing
the patch for Bug ID# 3568579. I couldn't figure out why insert buffering
wasn't working at all. Removing db_virtual and using straight db_mysql and
buffering worked. I am actually taking advantage that buffering doesn’t
work with db_virtual for use with the dialog module (seems to get a bit out
of sync with the database if buffering is on).

I thought insert buffering not working was intentional, however looking at
the db_virtual source is *should* work. My guess would be that the
capability flags are getting a bit messed up/overwritten somewhere. I can
open a bug for this, if it should actually be working.


1&2 are things that make working in a HA/distributed environment easier.
Having a cache go down should hopefully only cause a performance hit, not
an outage :)

We moved the futex patch into production recently and it seems to be
holding up thus far.

Regards,

Ryan


On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:20 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at opensips.org>wrote:

> **
> Hi Ryan,
>
> Indeed, several SIP stacks do not properly implement in-dialog OPTIONS -
> this is why we want to add re-INVITE as this is widely supported.
>
> 1) we can add that on the wish list, let's see what time will allow to do.
>
> 2) interesting idea...We need to check on connecting on the fly - add it
> to the list.
>
> 3) why is it not working ? could you detail the issues you have there ?
>
> Regarding the FUTEX patch  - it definitely looks really interesting - we
> will do a review and upload it on SVN.
>
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> OpenSIPS Founder and Developerhttp://www.opensips-solutions.com
>
>
> On 10/26/2012 09:01 PM, Ryan Bullock wrote:
>
> The re-Invite pinging sounds great, so long as it is separate dlg flag
> from the OPTIONs ping. I know from experience that certain systems
> (Asterisk) will sometimes incorrectly respond with a 200 OK to in-Dialog
> OPTIONS when the call is actually gone. On the other hand, some equipment
> can't handle re-Invites either.
>
> A few things that I have noted, and that would be nice to see in a future
> release:
>
> 1. Better failure handling for cachedb_*. We use memcached and have lost a
> cache node before. Opensips will just continually timeout trying to read
> from the failed node. The only way to get it to stop was to edit the
> configuration to remove the dead node then restart opensips. Would be nice
> if this behaved similar to db_virtual or rtpproxy in detecting timeouts and
> retrying so often, as well as some mi commands to disable a cache
> temporarily.
>
> 2. Opensips should be able to start even if db_virtual was not able to
> connect to all databases. So long as it can connect to at least 1 it should
> still work. We have had to move away from using db_vritual because of this
> problem.
>
> 3. Insert buffering support for db_virtual. Currently these two things
> don't work together, which can make it a bit difficult to scale out
> database writes.
>
> On another note, I submitted a patch for direct futex support under linux
> for locking. It has shown good promise in my testing and I am wondering if
> there is any interest in trying to get it included for 1.9?
>
> Regards,
>
> Ryan
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at opensips.org>wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would like to start a discussion about the next OpenSIPS major release
>> - and in this discussion anyone is welcomed with options, ideas, critics
>> and other. Your feedback is important to drive the project into a direction
>> that reflects the user's needs!.
>>
>> So, I will here the starting points, for both release planing and release
>> content.
>>
>>
>> Content
>> -------
>> What was done:
>>         http://www.opensips.org/Main/Ver190#toc2
>> What is planned:
>>         http://www.opensips.org/Main/Ver190#toc9
>> Planned items have priorities (for being addressed); it is a must to have
>> all items done for the next release, as we need to fit into a time frame.
>> Whatever is not done, will be left for the next release (1.10)
>>
>>
>> Planing
>> -------
>> Release candidate:
>>     second half of January 2012, depending on the progress with the items
>> to be done.
>> Testing phase:
>>     1 month allocated (it may be extended if critical problems show up)
>> Stable release:
>>     second half of February (after the testing phase is done).
>>
>>
>> Once again, your feedback on these matters is important to us.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> --
>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> Devel at lists.opensips.org
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing listDevel at lists.opensips.orghttp://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20121029/fde5dad0/attachment.htm>


More information about the Devel mailing list