VoIP Mailing List Archives
Mailing list archives for the VoIP community |
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
maillisting at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 3:27 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
HI all,
I have set up a queue with 2 members (A & B). 1st call is waiting
in the queue and a queue member A is ringing but don't take the call.
Member A keeps ringing. Then 2nd call is also get into the queue but
I found that queue member B doesn't ring. That's mean member B is
available to take call but somehow it can't get a call in the queue.
After that, member A takes the call of the 1st caller and member B gets ring.
Question:
-Why the 1st call will be stick the queue even there are many call behind?
-Is it a bug of the queue or just a setting of the queue to solve the problem?
5000 has 2 calls (max unlimited) in 'rrmemory' strategy (24s
holdtime), W:0, C:1, A:1, SL:100.0% within 120s
Members:
Local/2002 at sipauth (dynamic) (Not in use) has taken no calls yet
Local/2001 at sipauth (dynamic) (Unknown) has taken 1 calls (last
was 76 secs ago)
Callers:
1. SIP/2003-02cf0940 (wait: 0:47, prio: 0)
2. SIP/10.100.0.109-e4096dc0 (wait: 0:15, prio: 0) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dpobanz at hastingsuti... Guest
|
Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:57 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
Rilawich Ango Thursday, April 10, 2008 3:28 AM
Quote: | I have set up a queue with 2 members (A & B). 1st call is waiting
in the queue and a queue member A is ringing but don't take the call.
Member A keeps ringing. Then 2nd call is also get into the queue but
I found that queue member B doesn't ring. That's mean member B is
available to take call but somehow it can't get a call in the queue.
After that, member A takes the call of the 1st caller and
member B gets ring.
|
What version of Asterisk are you using? This is a know issue/feature
with version 1.2.x
In version 1.4.x, set autofill=yes in queues.conf and calls will fill in
as expected.
Don Pobanz |
|
Back to top |
|
|
maillisting at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:26 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
Thanks. I have checked that the queue.conf. I keep the default
setting as autofill=yes in my tests. That's mean even autofill=yes,
the 1st caller will still stick the whole queue.
asterisk version : 1.4.18
--queue.conf--
; AutoFill Behavior
; The old/current behavior of the queue has a serial type behavior
; in that the queue will make all waiting callers wait in the queue
; even if there is more than one available member ready to take
; calls until the head caller is connected with the member they
; were trying to get to. The next waiting caller in line then
; becomes the head caller, and they are then connected with the
; next available member and all available members and waiting callers
; waits while this happens. The new behavior, enabled by setting
; autofill=yes makes sure that when the waiting callers are connecting
; with available members in a parallel fashion until there are
; no more available members or no more waiting callers. This is
; probably more along the lines of how a queue should work and
; in most cases, you will want to enable this behavior. If you
; do not specify or comment out this option, it will default to no
; to keep backward compatibility with the old behavior.
;
autofill = yes
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 8:57 PM, Don Pobanz
<dpobanz at hastingsutilities.com> wrote:
Quote: | Rilawich Ango Thursday, April 10, 2008 3:28 AM
Quote: | I have set up a queue with 2 members (A & B). 1st call is waiting
in the queue and a queue member A is ringing but don't take the call.
Member A keeps ringing. Then 2nd call is also get into the queue but
I found that queue member B doesn't ring. That's mean member B is
available to take call but somehow it can't get a call in the queue.
After that, member A takes the call of the 1st caller and
member B gets ring.
|
What version of Asterisk are you using? This is a know issue/feature
with version 1.2.x
In version 1.4.x, set autofill=yes in queues.conf and calls will fill in
as expected.
Don Pobanz
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bweschke at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 10:07 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
Rilawich Ango wrote:
Quote: | Thanks. I have checked that the queue.conf. I keep the default
setting as autofill=yes in my tests. That's mean even autofill=yes,
the 1st caller will still stick the whole queue.
asterisk version : 1.4.18
--queue.conf--
; AutoFill Behavior
; The old/current behavior of the queue has a serial type behavior
; in that the queue will make all waiting callers wait in the queue
; even if there is more than one available member ready to take
; calls until the head caller is connected with the member they
; were trying to get to. The next waiting caller in line then
; becomes the head caller, and they are then connected with the
; next available member and all available members and waiting callers
; waits while this happens. The new behavior, enabled by setting
; autofill=yes makes sure that when the waiting callers are connecting
; with available members in a parallel fashion until there are
; no more available members or no more waiting callers. This is
; probably more along the lines of how a queue should work and
; in most cases, you will want to enable this behavior. If you
; do not specify or comment out this option, it will default to no
; to keep backward compatibility with the old behavior.
;
autofill = yes
| This was something I put in a long while back on 1.2 branch because we really needed it for 1.2 to "bug fix" the behavior, but also needed to prevent the change in behavior for those that didn't want it to change.
That being the case and we're in the day and age of 1.6 branches now, it'd be interesting to think of what people would think of deprecating this option completely now in /trunk in favor of the "autofill=yes" behavior being the only behavior available. I cannot think of any use cases where the autofill=no behavior might be desirable. That being said, I also might have blinders on so would be curious to here what the rest of the community has to say about it.
BJ
--
Bird's The Word Technologies, Inc.
http://www.btwtech.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
drew at oanda.com Guest
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:52 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
BJ Weschke wrote:
Quote: | Rilawich Ango wrote:
Quote: | Thanks. I have checked that the queue.conf. I keep the default
setting as autofill=yes in my tests. That's mean even autofill=yes,
the 1st caller will still stick the whole queue.
asterisk version : 1.4.18
--queue.conf--
; AutoFill Behavior
; The old/current behavior of the queue has a serial type behavior
; in that the queue will make all waiting callers wait in the queue
; even if there is more than one available member ready to take
; calls until the head caller is connected with the member they
; were trying to get to. The next waiting caller in line then
; becomes the head caller, and they are then connected with the
; next available member and all available members and waiting callers
; waits while this happens. The new behavior, enabled by setting
; autofill=yes makes sure that when the waiting callers are connecting
; with available members in a parallel fashion until there are
; no more available members or no more waiting callers. This is
; probably more along the lines of how a queue should work and
; in most cases, you will want to enable this behavior. If you
; do not specify or comment out this option, it will default to no
; to keep backward compatibility with the old behavior.
;
autofill = yes
| This was something I put in a long while back on 1.2 branch because we really needed it for 1.2 to "bug fix" the behavior, but also needed to prevent the change in behavior for those that didn't want it to change.
|
Is this option active in 1.2.24? I thought it was only in 1.4
It's not mentioned in the queues.conf.sample.
regards,
Drew
--
Drew Gibson
Systems Administrator
OANDA Corporation
www.oanda.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
maillisting at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:42 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
Do you mean autofill works in 1.4.x? But it doesn't work even I set it.
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 11:07 AM, BJ Weschke <bweschke at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | Rilawich Ango wrote:
Quote: | Thanks. I have checked that the queue.conf. I keep the default
setting as autofill=yes in my tests. That's mean even autofill=yes,
the 1st caller will still stick the whole queue.
asterisk version : 1.4.18
--queue.conf--
; AutoFill Behavior
; The old/current behavior of the queue has a serial type behavior
; in that the queue will make all waiting callers wait in the queue
; even if there is more than one available member ready to take
; calls until the head caller is connected with the member they
; were trying to get to. The next waiting caller in line then
; becomes the head caller, and they are then connected with the
; next available member and all available members and waiting callers
; waits while this happens. The new behavior, enabled by setting
; autofill=yes makes sure that when the waiting callers are connecting
; with available members in a parallel fashion until there are
; no more available members or no more waiting callers. This is
; probably more along the lines of how a queue should work and
; in most cases, you will want to enable this behavior. If you
; do not specify or comment out this option, it will default to no
; to keep backward compatibility with the old behavior.
;
autofill = yes
| This was something I put in a long while back on 1.2 branch because we really needed it for 1.2 to "bug fix" the behavior, but also needed to prevent the change in behavior for those that didn't want it to change.
That being the case and we're in the day and age of 1.6 branches now, it'd be interesting to think of what people would think of deprecating this option completely now in /trunk in favor of the "autofill=yes" behavior being the only behavior available. I cannot think of any use cases where the autofill=no behavior might be desirable. That being said, I also might have blinders on so would be curious to here what the rest of the community has to say about it.
BJ
--
Bird's The Word Technologies, Inc.
http://www.btwtech.com/
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
maillisting at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 8:50 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
Anyone can update me about the queue sticking by a caller? Is it
solved in version 1.4.x? How?
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Rilawich Ango <maillisting at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | Do you mean autofill works in 1.4.x? But it doesn't work even I set it.
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 11:07 AM, BJ Weschke <bweschke at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | Rilawich Ango wrote:
Quote: | Thanks. I have checked that the queue.conf. I keep the default
setting as autofill=yes in my tests. That's mean even autofill=yes,
the 1st caller will still stick the whole queue.
asterisk version : 1.4.18
--queue.conf--
; AutoFill Behavior
; The old/current behavior of the queue has a serial type behavior
; in that the queue will make all waiting callers wait in the queue
; even if there is more than one available member ready to take
; calls until the head caller is connected with the member they
; were trying to get to. The next waiting caller in line then
; becomes the head caller, and they are then connected with the
; next available member and all available members and waiting callers
; waits while this happens. The new behavior, enabled by setting
; autofill=yes makes sure that when the waiting callers are connecting
; with available members in a parallel fashion until there are
; no more available members or no more waiting callers. This is
; probably more along the lines of how a queue should work and
; in most cases, you will want to enable this behavior. If you
; do not specify or comment out this option, it will default to no
; to keep backward compatibility with the old behavior.
;
autofill = yes
| This was something I put in a long while back on 1.2 branch because we really needed it for 1.2 to "bug fix" the behavior, but also needed to prevent the change in behavior for those that didn't want it to change.
That being the case and we're in the day and age of 1.6 branches now, it'd be interesting to think of what people would think of deprecating this option completely now in /trunk in favor of the "autofill=yes" behavior being the only behavior available. I cannot think of any use cases where the autofill=no behavior might be desirable. That being said, I also might have blinders on so would be curious to here what the rest of the community has to say about it.
BJ
--
Bird's The Word Technologies, Inc.
http://www.btwtech.com/
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
m at orderlysoftware.com Guest
|
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:53 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
Two use-cases where autofill=no is desirable:
1) If it's important that you answer your callers in strict order (i.e.
in order to meet estimated wait time commitments etc).
2) If your queue members/agents are local channels (as local channels
are always available, so call attempts will be made regardless of who's
talking).
Kind regards,
Matt.
BJ wrote
Quote: | / This was something I put in a long while back on 1.2 branch because we really needed it for 1.2
to "bug fix" the behavior, but also needed to prevent the change in behavior for those that
didn't want it to change.
| />/
/>/ That being the case and we're in the day and age of 1.6 branches now, it'd be interesting to
Quote: | think of what people would think of deprecating this option completely now in /trunk in favor
of the "autofill=yes" behavior being the only behavior available. I cannot think of any use
cases where the autofill=no behavior might be desirable. That being said, I also might have
blinders on so would be curious to here what the rest of the community has to say about it.
| />/
/>/ BJ/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20080415/cc532d83/attachment.htm |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bweschke at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:08 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
With regard to (1), yes, very good point there and certainly reason
enough to leave it alone. I had completely forgotten about a use case
like that.
With regard to (2), I'm pretty sure there's been work done in the
recent past to make chan_local more state aware so that this might not
be the case any more depending on what version you are using. I might be
wrong there, but I know I've got a patch or two hanging around that did
make this work.
Matt King wrote:
Quote: | Two use-cases where autofill=no is desirable:
1) If it's important that you answer your callers in strict order
(i.e. in order to meet estimated wait time commitments etc).
2) If your queue members/agents are local channels (as local channels
are always available, so call attempts will be made regardless of
who's talking).
Kind regards,
Matt.
BJ wrote
Quote: | / This was something I put in a long while back on 1.2 branch because we really needed it for 1.2
to "bug fix" the behavior, but also needed to prevent the change in behavior for those that
didn't want it to change.
| />/
/>/ That being the case and we're in the day and age of 1.6 branches now, it'd be interesting to
Quote: | think of what people would think of deprecating this option completely now in /trunk in favor
of the "autofill=yes" behavior being the only behavior available. I cannot think of any use
cases where the autofill=no behavior might be desirable. That being said, I also might have
blinders on so would be curious to here what the rest of the community has to say about it.
| />/
/>/ BJ/
| --
--
Bird's The Word Technologies, Inc.
http://www.btwtech.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
atis at iq-labs.net Guest
|
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 7:21 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
Hey,
I just found out today that it doesn't work on Asterisk 1.4.19 (at
least for realtime queues) if you have autofill=yes in queues.conf.
However it works if you add it in queue settings for each queue, for
realtime that would be
ALTER TABLE queue_table ADD COLUMN autofill TINYINT(1) UNSIGNED DEFAULT 1;
For following this issue, see http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=12445
Regards,
Atis
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 4:42 AM, Rilawich Ango <maillisting at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | Do you mean autofill works in 1.4.x? But it doesn't work even I set it.
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 11:07 AM, BJ Weschke <bweschke at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | Rilawich Ango wrote:
Quote: | Thanks. I have checked that the queue.conf. I keep the default
setting as autofill=yes in my tests. That's mean even autofill=yes,
the 1st caller will still stick the whole queue.
asterisk version : 1.4.18
--queue.conf--
; AutoFill Behavior
; The old/current behavior of the queue has a serial type behavior
; in that the queue will make all waiting callers wait in the queue
; even if there is more than one available member ready to take
; calls until the head caller is connected with the member they
; were trying to get to. The next waiting caller in line then
; becomes the head caller, and they are then connected with the
; next available member and all available members and waiting callers
; waits while this happens. The new behavior, enabled by setting
; autofill=yes makes sure that when the waiting callers are connecting
; with available members in a parallel fashion until there are
; no more available members or no more waiting callers. This is
; probably more along the lines of how a queue should work and
; in most cases, you will want to enable this behavior. If you
; do not specify or comment out this option, it will default to no
; to keep backward compatibility with the old behavior.
;
autofill = yes
| This was something I put in a long while back on 1.2 branch because we really needed it for 1.2 to "bug fix" the behavior, but also needed to prevent the change in behavior for those that didn't want it to change.
That being the case and we're in the day and age of 1.6 branches now, it'd be interesting to think of what people would think of deprecating this option completely now in /trunk in favor of the "autofill=yes" behavior being the only behavior available. I cannot think of any use cases where the autofill=no behavior might be desirable. That being said, I also might have blinders on so would be curious to here what the rest of the community has to say about it.
BJ
--
Bird's The Word Technologies, Inc.
http://www.btwtech.com/
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
--
Atis Lezdins,
VoIP Project Manager / Developer,
atis at iq-labs.net
Skype: atis.lezdins
Cell Phone: +371 28806004
Cell Phone: +1 800 7300689
Work phone: +1 800 7502835 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dbc_asterisk at advan.ca Guest
|
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:46 am Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
Quote: | Two use-cases where autofill=no is desirable:
1) If it's important that you answer your callers in strict order (i.e.
in order to meet estimated wait time commitments etc).
|
Not always the case. Let's look at multiple queue assignment where agents
have skills (logged in) to multiple queues.
AGT1: Has SkillA, SkillB, SkillC
AGT2: Has SKillA
SLA: 24 seconds
Senario --------
Calls in Queues:
Call1: SkillA - 15 seconds
Call2: SkillB - 12 seconds
AGT1 will become available in now() +2 seconds
AGT2 will become available in now() +6 seconds
------------------------
CASE 1 (Calls in strict order):
TIME=now()+2: AGT1 becomes available, CALL1 matched, time in Q now 17
seconds, assigned, SLA OK.
TIME=now()+6: AGT2 becomes available, CALL2 NOT matched, not assigned, AGT2
idle, awaiting AGT1 to finish call, time in Q now 18 seconds.
TIME=now()+10: AGT2 idle, CALL2 sitting in queue, SLA failed.
CASE 2 (Calls not in order, system SMART enough to read into the queue and
predict availability based on historical data)
TIME=now()+2: AGT1 becomes available, CALL1 matches, but system knows that
CALL2 is also a match and remaining agents are NOT a match. Predicted
availability says call 2 will fail SLA, system assigns CALL2 to AGT2, time
in Q now 14 seconds, SLA OK.
TIME=now()+6: AGT2 becomes available, CALL1 matches and is assigned, time
in Q now 21 seconds, SLA OK.
TIME=now()+10: AGT1 on call 2, SLA OK. AGT2 on call 1, SLA OK.
Now this isn't strictly the problem originally described but I'm trying to
articulate where the use case as specified falls down in real-world
environments. This also shows and area that Asterisk (and _many_ other
switches) have not gone yet but we need to aspire to. This type of
functionality is why you currently shell out the bucks for Avaya.
- dbc. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
maillisting at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:21 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] question about queue |
|
|
Yup, I am using realtime queue. Do you mean the global setting in
queue.conf is useless and you have to set every thing in each queue to
activate the settings? If it is true, does it also apply to other
realtime settings?
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Atis Lezdins <atis at iq-labs.net> wrote:
Quote: | Hey,
I just found out today that it doesn't work on Asterisk 1.4.19 (at
least for realtime queues) if you have autofill=yes in queues.conf.
However it works if you add it in queue settings for each queue, for
realtime that would be
ALTER TABLE queue_table ADD COLUMN autofill TINYINT(1) UNSIGNED DEFAULT 1;
For following this issue, see http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=12445
Regards,
Atis
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 4:42 AM, Rilawich Ango <maillisting at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | Do you mean autofill works in 1.4.x? But it doesn't work even I set it.
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 11:07 AM, BJ Weschke <bweschke at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | Rilawich Ango wrote:
Quote: | Thanks. I have checked that the queue.conf. I keep the default
setting as autofill=yes in my tests. That's mean even autofill=yes,
the 1st caller will still stick the whole queue.
asterisk version : 1.4.18
--queue.conf--
; AutoFill Behavior
; The old/current behavior of the queue has a serial type behavior
; in that the queue will make all waiting callers wait in the queue
; even if there is more than one available member ready to take
; calls until the head caller is connected with the member they
; were trying to get to. The next waiting caller in line then
; becomes the head caller, and they are then connected with the
; next available member and all available members and waiting callers
; waits while this happens. The new behavior, enabled by setting
; autofill=yes makes sure that when the waiting callers are connecting
; with available members in a parallel fashion until there are
; no more available members or no more waiting callers. This is
; probably more along the lines of how a queue should work and
; in most cases, you will want to enable this behavior. If you
; do not specify or comment out this option, it will default to no
; to keep backward compatibility with the old behavior.
;
autofill = yes
| This was something I put in a long while back on 1.2 branch because we really needed it for 1.2 to "bug fix" the behavior, but also needed to prevent the change in behavior for those that didn't want it to change.
That being the case and we're in the day and age of 1.6 branches now, it'd be interesting to think of what people would think of deprecating this option completely now in /trunk in favor of the "autofill=yes" behavior being the only behavior available. I cannot think of any use cases where the autofill=no behavior might be desirable. That being said, I also might have blinders on so would be curious to here what the rest of the community has to say about it.
BJ
--
Bird's The Word Technologies, Inc.
http://www.btwtech.com/
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
--
Atis Lezdins,
VoIP Project Manager / Developer,
atis at iq-labs.net
Skype: atis.lezdins
Cell Phone: +371 28806004
Cell Phone: +1 800 7300689
Work phone: +1 800 7502835
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|