[OpenSIPS-Devel] [RELEASES] Planing OpenSIPS 1.9.0 major release
Vlad Paiu
vladpaiu at opensips.org
Tue Oct 30 15:23:43 CET 2012
Hello Ryan,
Can you please open a SF bug about the db_virtual with insert buffering,
describing the setup and what's happening ( if no rows were inserted at
all, or there were rows missing, etc ) ?
Also, thanks for the futex patch, we will definitely look into it.
Regards,
Vlad Paiu
OpenSIPS Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com
On 10/29/2012 10:39 PM, Ryan Bullock wrote:
> 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 <mailto: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 Developer
> http://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 <mailto: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 <mailto:Devel at lists.opensips.org>
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> Devel at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Devel at lists.opensips.org>
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20121030/76beced8/attachment.htm>
More information about the Devel
mailing list