asterisk users - May 2005 - realtime versus static

>From the viewpoint of being reliable and scaleable, I'm wondering what
using realtime would really get me.

Given the number of additional things that can go wrong using
realtime, I'm thinking about just using the standard text config files
and pushing them to the asterisk servers via scp from a configuration
server.

I've also thought about keeping the configs in a database but then
exporting them into the text config files on the configuration server
then pushing them to the asterisk servers.  That would give us most of
the benefits of realtime without the downside.

Any thoughts on this?

Chris

>> From the viewpoint of being reliable and scaleable, I'm wondering
what
> using realtime would really get me.
> 
> Given the number of additional things that can go wrong using
> realtime, I'm thinking about just using the standard text config files
> and pushing them to the asterisk servers via scp from a configuration
> server.
    Did I miss something here? Who said/proved that ARA was un-reliable and
un-scaleable, and that is has "number of additional things that can go
wrong"?

    Lets see, ARA is written into the core code (meaning you can't unload
it) of asterisk and was written by the author of asterisk. Sounds reliable
to me.

    Multiple asterisk servers can use the same database and share the same
configs. Sounds scaleable to me. Other than the db server going down, I
can't think of anything else that could "go wrong" with ARA.

    Perhaps my judgement is clouded by the fact that I've been running ARA
for the past several months in a carrier class production level...hmm..

-Matthew

P.S. Snacktime, please fix your reply-to header. For some reason the two
addresses have merged.