>>> Matt Roth wrote:
>>>
>>> These statements seem contradictory. I know of no way (short of a
>>> custom patch) to tell Monitor() to mix the in and out legs prior to
>>> writing them to disk. On the other hand, MixMonitor() does just that
>>> and I believe it also buffers the writes in a way that circumvents the
>>> I/O bottleneck associated with Monitor().
>>
>> Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
>>
>> Both of these statements are correct.
>
> Wai Wu wrote:
>
> Except that mixmonitor still has a bug in it.
Wai,
Please explain how "the in and out channels are mixed first before they
are written to the disk" using "monitor with no mixing onto the scsi
drive." I'd love to implement this on our system to cut in half the I/O
associated with Monitor().
Also, what bug does MixMonitor() have? It is my understanding that
MixMonitor() is based on ChanSpy() and we seem to be having an issue
with ChanSpy() where the legs of a call fall out of synch. My hunch is
that it has to do with a caller being muted or placed on hold. Do these
issues seem related?
Matthew Roth
InterMedia Marketing Solutions
Software Engineer and Systems Developer
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
Asterisk-Users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
