[sr-dev] Question about config framework (ser)

[marius zbihlei]

Henning Westerholt wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 February 2010, Miklos Tirpak wrote:
>   
>> [..]
>> 2) Some modules update local or even shared memory variables based on
>> cfg variable changes. It would be nice to solve as many cases within the
>> framework as possible. For example the modules could have write access
>> to their variables during fixup, or more complicated structures could be
>> stored not only int and str vars. If you miss any feature therefore you
>> keep variables outside of the framework then please speak up!
>>     
>
> Hi Miklos,
>
> indeed this is another problem which we've also discussed during the planning 
> for the cfg framework migration work, its present for example in the ratelimit 
> and carrierroute modules. 
>
> Quite a few kamailio modules implemented also their own version of reload 
> functionality with a FIFO command, e.g. "reload_fifo" in 
> modules/carrierroute/cr_fifo.c. This is more or less a similar use case like 
> the cfg framework represents (atomic reload of a variable), but with a a bit 
> more complicated data structure (route_data_t).
>
> So having a generic version for this in the cfg framework would be indeed nice 
> in my opinion.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Henning
>
>   
Hello,

I have done some tests regarding the on_set_child_cb function (executed 
only once via CFG_CB_ONLY_ONCE or per each child process) and for what I 
want it does a good job. If the maximum delay is 1/16th of a second and 
above that, it will not create bugs like the one Andrei described in a 
previous mail, then I think this approach is good enough for the cases I 
identified.

Cheers,
Marius