[Devel] Request for discussion: t_relay() internal error processing

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu bogdan at voice-system.ro
Tue Sep 5 16:16:22 CEST 2006


Ron Winacott wrote:

>On Monday 04 September 2006 10:26, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
>  
>
>>Based on this, here is what I suggest:
>>    1) have a new param for disabling the auto reply in t_relay()
>>    2) t_relay will return several error codes:
>>          -1 = no transaction created -> need to use sl_* functions
>>          -2 = transaction created, relay failed -> may destroy
>>transaction, reply via TM with error, trigger failover.
>>
>>
>>any comments on this ?
>>    
>>
>
>This all sounds good for the following reasons:
>	1) - The new parameter covers the backward compatibility case where the 
>	script wants the old way of doing things.
>	2) - I assume there will be new script calls to deal with deleting the 
>	failed transaction, and the transaction could be freed once the script exits 
>	to avoid memory leaks. If not freed by the script call.
>	
>My only concern is, do you think the two result/error codes are sufficient to 
>cover all of the cases? The idea of "may destroy" leaves me with an uneasy 
>feeling.
>  
>
actually the "may" was for the script writer - he can explicitly destroy 
the transaction via t_release() or indirectly via t_reply() / t_relay().

If he does not handle properly the transaction in the script, the TM 
module will take care of it and destroy the transaction but it will 
generate some logs about it...
You can test this by doing only a "t_newtran()" for a request without 
forwarding or replying it....:)

regards,
bogdan



More information about the Devel mailing list