7 Nov
2022
7 Nov
'22
3:31 p.m.
I was not sure if there were some static buffer size. You are right, of course, and given
modern resources the concern about compute-heavy JSON parsing is probably rather
academic.
I require fairly extensive deserialisation into non-scalar AVP structures which are also
transaction-persistent. This in effect would require two stages of marshalling. I would
rather do it in one place and take the hit on compute-heavy inspection of the JSON payload
twice, especially since it’s wrapped behind the convenience of libjansson.
Thank you for the insights!
— Alex
—
Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
On Nov 7, 2022, at 7:01 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<miconda(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
$var() uses pkg memory, so it is available pkg at that moment that sets
the limit of how much a $var() can store.
If you need only specific values from json, you can store only them in
some variables to avoid reparsing. On the other hand, the operations are
in memory, so probably not big penalty.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 07.11.22 12:29, Alex Balashov wrote:
Hi Daniel,
Thank you. It’s just a pity because it’s a large JSON blob, so would have to be parsed
twice (it also contains the transaction ID/label). I can change the wire format so as to
not require this, probably, though.
Do you know offhand what the maximum length of the value that can be assigned to a $var
is?
—
Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
__________________________________________________________
Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender!
Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
On Nov 7,
2022, at 2:56 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
iirc, the continue is done by the same worker process that executes the
event route, so you can pass it via $var(...), otherwise you can
propagate it to other process via mqueue (+rtimer). Using htable with a
key based on transaction ids should be fine as well, at the end htable
is designed as a fast key/value in-memory storage.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 07.11.22 05:36, Alex Balashov wrote:
Hi,
I am t_continue()ing a transaction inside of event_route[evapi:message-received]. The
$evapi(msg) has quite a bit of payload that will be needed by the resumed transaction.
Is there a good way to inject this data into the transaction scope externally? No [X]AVPs
created in the event_route persist, of course, since the route is scoped outside of the
transaction.
I have been using htable to pass data into the transaction, keyed by the index and label.
But, this strikes me as a kind of clumsy memory synchronisation anti-pattern. Is there a
better way?
Cheers,
— Alex
--
Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC
Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free)
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/
__________________________________________________________
Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender!
Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda