Hi Stan, when comes to handling retransmissions (and not CANCELs and ACKs belonging to an INVITE transaction), both function do more or less the same - handle the retransmission (by retransmitting the last sent reply) and breaking the script execution - of course, the difference is if no retransmission, t_newtran() will create a new transaction for the request.
So : t_check_trans(); t_new_trans(); is a bit redundant. Only: t_new_trans(); will do exactly the same job. Again, this is true only in the context of non-CANCEL and non-ACK requests! Regards, Bogdan Stanisław Pitucha wrote: > 2009/7/14 Alex Balashov <abalas...@evaristesys.com>: > >> http://www.opensips.org/html/docs/modules/1.5.x/tm.html#id272150 >> > > A bit related question. Since the docs mention: > "If the processing of requests may take long time (e.g. DB lookups) > and the retransmission arrives before t_relay() is called, you can use > the t_newtran() function to manually create a transaction." > > Is there any situation where: > > t_check_trans(); > t_new_trans(); > > after all cancel / ack checks is a bad thing to do? Or maybe even: > > t_check_trans(); > if (is_method('INVITE|UPDATE|REFER')) t_new_trans(); > > since everything else can be safely duplicated / is rather light in > processing. > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.opensips.org > http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users