asterisk users - Apr 2006 - call center running Asterisk -sound quality-critical!

Except that mixmonitor still has a bug in it. 

-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Kevin P.
Fleming
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 11:45 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] call center running Asterisk -sound
quality-critical!

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().
Both of these statements are correct.
_______________________________________________
--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

On 4/12/06, Wai Wu <wwu@calltrol.com> wrote:
> Except that mixmonitor still has a bug in it.
>
 Had. Corrected yesterday.

--
Bird's The Word Technologies, Inc.
http://www.btwtech.com/

Wai Wu wrote:
> Except that mixmonitor still has a bug in it. 
>   
What kind of bug? Issue number?
FYI: yesterday one issue has been fixed :D
http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=6457
Did you mean that type of bug? If something else, please let us know...

T.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com
> [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Kevin P.
> Fleming
> Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 11:45 AM
> To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
> Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] call center running Asterisk -sound
> quality-critical!
>
> 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().
>>     
>
> Both of these statements are correct.
> ______________________________________________
>

>>> 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

> 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?

Just bumping this in case you missed it the first time.  It's easy to do 
with a list as busy as this one.  I'm sure everyone using Monitor() 
would love to hear how you're doing this.

Matthew Roth
InterMedia Marketing Solutions
Software Engineer and Systems Developer