Le 06/09/2018 à 16:18, Matthew Jordan a écrit :
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 5:23 PM Seán C. McCord <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
As to the events should have a deterministic order or not, I
cannot speak, but this is definitely normal behaviour.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 12:22 PM Jean Aunis <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hello,
It looks like the ARI events ordering during channel
destruction is not deterministic. I noticed this for
ChannelLeftBridge and ChannelDestroyed events : given a
channel is in a bridge and is hanged up, sometimes
ChannelLeftBridge is raised before ChannelDestroyed, sometimes
it's the contrary. Test conditions are exactly the same in
both cases.
Is this non-deterministic behaviour normal, or should it be
considered as a bug ?
To my mind, ChannelDestroyed should always be the very last
event raised for a given channel. From a developper point of
view, it would give a clear indication that the resources
associated to the channel can be freed.
Regards
The events regarding a Channel entering and leaving a Bridge are
deterministic with respect to the Bridge's lifetime, but are not
deterministic with respect to the Channel's lifetime. While it's a bit
different, this is discussed somewhat on the AMI specification page:
<snip>
Thanks for the answer, I understand the problem. I'll live with it.
Regards
Jean
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
Astricon is coming up October 9-11! Signup is available at:
https://www.asterisk.org/community/astricon-user-conference
asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
