[SR-Users] Update existing module or create new?

Henning Westerholt hw at kamailio.org
Wed Feb 6 16:16:04 CET 2013

Am Dienstag, 5. Februar 2013, 13:55:41 schrieb Charles Chance:
>> as the original author of the module I'd think that changing or replacing
>> the existing module would be the way to go. So far I'd not recieved that
>> much of bug reports against the existing module. And as Alex Balashov also
>> mentioned recently, there are some other issues with the current library.
>> If existing users need to stay with the old module, its available in the 
>> git and the existing releases, for the new release we should go with a 
>> module which supports the newer library.
>> It would be nice if you could stay with the existing PV API, which I
>> modelled somehow after the htable module. If you need to change something,
>> just announce it on the devel list and ask for feedback.

> We have indeed used the module in the past with no issues - so thank you for
> writing and sharing :)
> Very happy to stay with existing PVs if possible. The only thing I'd like to
> see different is to set value and expiry at the same time, instead of
> having to set value, then alter expiration. This has to be better than
> setting a value with some default expiry, getting that same value back
> again, then re-setting the value once more with a different expiry?
> Could this be implemented at PV level? Something like $mct(key:expiry) =
> value? And if expiry is omitted, we use default set in params.

Hi Charles,

thanks, good to know that you use it. :-) With regards to the expiry value, 
yes I think this could be implemented like this. Just one remark, the syntax 
that other PVs uses is "=>", like in 

Then it would be $mct(key=>expiry) = value

Best regards,

Henning Westerholt

More information about the sr-users mailing list