How can I get call duration during the call via AMI?
something like Status() or CoreShowChannels() but seconds needs to be after Answering call
You have following options:
1)You can collect "Link" events and store info about calls start in your application. AMI is not designed to got call info. This one is CORRECT way.
2) issue command
http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Asterisk+Manager+API+Action+Command
with
"core show channel CHANNEL_NAME_HERE"
It will have info about duration
3)Other option is get variable CDR(billsec)
http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Asterisk+Manager+API+Action+GetVar
Related
I have a workflow that starts with a shell script node that accepts a numeric parameter and it directs into different hive scripts using this parameter. How do I loop this workflow so it would execute based on a range of number as the parameter?
What I do right now is I change parameter in the GUI, execute, wait for it to finish, then change the parameter for the next number and rerun again.
You can achieve this using sub-flow, read the following blog to understand how to implement http://www.helmutzechmann.com/2015/04/23/oozie-loops/
The shell action output can be captured and accessed by the other action
${wf:actionData('shellAction')['variablename']}
Hope this helps.
-Ravi
In Signalr, is there any support for having events instead of callbacks.
Let me explain before you grab your pitchforks.
In following with the first example here
Clients.All.addContosoChatMessageToPage(name, message);
Wouldn't call a hub proxy's addContosoChatMessageToPage(name, message), but would dispatch a addContosoChatMessageToPage event with some extra information. (not asking that it be the same api call exactly)
The reason I'm asking all of this is because
This works much better alongside functional reactive programming frameworks like ELM and bacon.js
I don't want to do this myself and essentially create my own sub-framework. Of course I could always do Clients.All.CreateEvent(name,params...) where I'm continually calling back my method to do this event creation
I actually think events work better in some scenarios for separation of concerns.
Am I crazy? does something like this exist?
This is already supported. If you don't want to do the dispatching yourself and you know the name of the "event" or "method" at runtime you can do this:
IClientProxy proxy = Clients.All;
proxy.Invoke(name, args);
This lets you write code where you may not know the name of the event you're trying to callback on the client at compile time.
I am using RemoteObjects to call ZendAMF PHP from Flex/Flash Builder 4.6. I want to stop or abort a method call before it sends the request to the server based on an event or similar.
I have a class where I create and store all the RemoteObjects - for example:
activityLogService = new RemoteObject("zend");
activityLogService.endpoint=endpointServer;
activityLogService.addEventListener(FaultEvent.FAULT,faultHandler);
Then later I can simply call this object:
remotingService.activityLogService .getRecords();
I am trying to find a way in my remotingService object to stop the request - and not send anything to the server - for example if some variables are not set properly.
I noticed there is an invoke event:
activityLogService.addEventListener(InvokeEvent.INVOKE,invokeHandler);
However, I can not tell if that's going to stop things at the proper point, or if it's even possible to actually STOP the request - if so, how?
Thanks!
Check out this question
Flex : Is it possible to stop a remote call?
If you're using a RemoteObject you should be able to call
getOperation() method and then cancel() on the corresponding
operation.
I have a web service with three methods: StartReport(...), IsReportFinished(...) and GetReport(...), each with various parameters. I also have a client application (Silverlight) which will first call StartReport to trigger the generation of the report, then it will poll the server with IsReportFinished to see if it's done and once done, it calls GetReport to get the report. Very simple...
StartReport is simple. It first generates an unique ID, then it will use System.Threading.Tasks.Task.Factory.StartNew() to create a new task that will generate the report and finally return the unique ID while the task continues to run in the background. IsReportFinished will just check the system for the unique ID to see if the report is done. Once done, the unique ID can be used to retrieve the report.
But I need a way to cancel the task, which is implemented by adding a new parameter to IsReportFinished. When called with cancel==true it will again check if the report is done. If the report is finished, there's nothing to cancel. Otherwise, it needs to cancel the task.
How do I cancel this task?
You could use a cancellation token to cancel TPL tasks. And here's another example.
How do I create PL/SQL function which waits for update on some row for specified timeout and then returns.
What I want to accomplish is - I have long running process which will update it's status to ASYNC_PROCESS table by process_id. I need function which returns with true/false when this process has completed, but also I need this function to wait some time for this process complete, return on timeout or return imediately with true, when process has completed. I don't want to use sleep(1 sec), because in such case I will be having 1 sec lag. I don't want to use sleep(1 msec), because in such case I am spending cpu resources (and 1msec lag).
Is there a good way how experienced programmer would accomplish this?
That function will be called from .NET (So I need minimal lag between DB operation and .NET/UI)
THNX,
Beef
I think the most sensible thing to do in this case is to use update triggers on that ASYNC_PROCESS table.
You should also look into the DBMS_ALERT package. Here's an edited excerpt from that doc:
Create an alert:
DBMS_ALERT.REGISTER('emp_table_alert');
Create a trigger on your table to fire the alert:
CREATE TRIGGER emptrig AFTER INSERT ON emp
BEGIN
DBMS_ALERT.SIGNAL('emp_table_alert', 'message_text');
END;
From your .net code, you can the use something that calls this:
DBMS_ALERT.WAITONE('emp_table_alert', :message, :status, :timeout);
Make sure you read the docs for what :status and :timeout do.
You should look at Oracle Advanced Queuing. It offers the kind of functions your looking for.
You'll probably need a separate queue table where a trigger on ASYNC_PROCESS inserts messages. You then use the AQ functions to retrieve (or wait for) the next message in the queue table.
If you're doing this in C#.NET, why wouldn't you simply spawn a worker thread to do the update (via ODAC)? Why hand the responsibility over to Oracle when (it seems) you want a .NET process to make the update call (in background) and have the main process be notified of its completion.
See here and here for examples, although there are several approaches in .NET for this (delegates, events, async callbacks, thread pools, etc)