On 4/24/11 1:21 PM, Bruce Ferrell wrote:
In the following exampleexten => _1NXXNXXXXXX,1,Set(GROUP(outbound)=myprovider) exten => _1NXXNXXXXXX,n,Set(COUNT=${GROUP_COUNT(myprovider@outbound)}) exten => _1NXXNXXXXXX,n,NoOp(There are ${COUNT} calls for myprovider) exten => _1NXXNXXXXXX,n,GotoIf($[ ${COUNT} > 2 ]?denied : continue) exten => _1NXXNXXXXXX,n(denied),NoOp(There are too many calls up) exten => _1NXXNXXXXXX,n,Hangup() exten => _1NXXNXXXXXX,n(continue),GoSub(callmyprovider,${EXTEN},1) instead of sequentially numbering the priorities, the "n" construct is used. I find that when I attempt this in the realtime extensions table only, the first priority step is recognized. If I sequentially number the priorities and add a label, the step is no longer recognized. Is this behavior by design or an error?
i think it's probably by design. unlike reading from a text file, database rely on column values for sorting. i don't think having 'n' as the priority will sort the way you want. -- Edwin Lam <edwin....@officegeneral.com> Systems Engineer, OfficeWyze, Inc. Ph: +1 415 439 4988 Fax: +1 415 283 3370 http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xD6506D20 -- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
