As this stray interrupt exception problem is gone, I'll love to know how =
people feel about having only one thread for sending command to =
asterisk. This will save the opening of a connection and the login =
required.
Particularly, is the current Asterisk manager connection stable enough =
for this approach to work or people think that sending each command =
through a new connection is a safer approach.
Thanks in advance.
King
-----Original Message-----
From: ast...@li... =
[mailto:ast...@li...] On Behalf Of =
Stefan Reuter
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 8:33 PM
To: ast...@li...
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-java-users] ManagerReader Interrupt
Brett Sutton wrote:
> I believe a better way of dealing with this problem is to use
> Object.wait(x) and Object.notify. For the purposes of sendAction the
> affects are identical without the nasty side effects of calling =
interrupt.
>=20
> I hope this makes some sense.
yes it makes a lot of sense. I followed your suggestion and it seems to
work nicely. It also simplifies DefaultManagerConnection.
Its in 0.3 now - if you have a chance please test the latest version
from svn trunk:
http://svn.reucon.net/repos/asterisk-java/trunk
here is the diff:
http://svn.reucon.net/fisheye/viewrep/repos/asterisk-java/trunk/src/main/=
java/org/asteriskjava/manager/DefaultManagerConnection.java?r1=3D40&r2=3D=
81
Thanks!
=3DStefan
--=20
reuter network consulting
Neusser Str. 110
50760 K=C3=B6ln
Germany
Telefon: +49 221 1305699-0
Telefax: +49 221 1305699-90
E-Mail: sr...@re...
Jabber: sr...@ja...
|
