[Users] db_extra in acc - is order relevant

[Klaus Darilion]

Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya wrote:
> aaargh.
> i totally forgot about the missed_calls table.
> thanx
> 
> cheers
> 
> p.s.  why does the CANCEL still get logged to acc?

maybe you account failed transactions?

> 
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
>> the missed_calls table must have same structure as acc table. The same 
>> information is saved in both tables (similar to location and aliases 
>> tables).
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>> On 05/03/2006 05:24 PM, Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya wrote:
>>> Hmmm.
>>>
>>> well, heres an interesting issue then
>>> I have an additional column (src_ip) which I log using db_extra  
>>> ("src_ip=$avp($srcIp);)
>>> It works. Well, mostly works. If I CANCEL an INVITE, I get the 
>>> following error
>>>         9(9231) ACC: call missed: 
>>> call_id=3c6d8d5f15f9-7a9jw7ca79xt at snom190........
>>>         9(9231) submit_query: Unknown column 'src_ip' in 'field list'
>>>         9(9231) db_insert: Error while submitting query
>>> Inspecting acc shows that the CANCEL got logged, but the INVITE didn't.
>>> However, INVITEs get logged for /all/ other transactions.
>>>
>>> Anything obvious?
>>>
>>> Come to think of it, it looks like acc logs both the INVITE and the 
>>> CANCEL when the transaction is completed.  Is this correct?  Should 
>>> it work this way?  Or should it log the INVITE once it passes it on, 
>>> and then log the CANCEL later?
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 05/03/2006 04:36 PM, Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya wrote:
>>>>> I've added a couple of fields to the acc table (and am logging 
>>>>> additional information to them, e.g., src_ip, some avps, etc.).
>>>>> Is the order of the fields in acc relevant?  i.e. if the modparam 
>>>>> statement has the fields listed in the order field1, field2, 
>>>>> field3, do the columns need to be in the same order?
>>>> no, the order is not relevant.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess a bigger question is, does my adding columns to acc cause 
>>>>> any larger compatibility issues (ignore upgrading acc for a 
>>>>> moment.  also, i know, i should have 'em in a different table, 
>>>>> etc., etc.)???
>>>> openser just writes in acc, there is no compatibility issue that 
>>>> implies openser.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Daniel
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> cheers
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Users mailing list
>>>>> Users at openser.org
>>>>> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>   
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users at openser.org
>>> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>   
>>
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users