[asterisk-commits] murf: branch group/CDRfix5 r74513 - /team/group/CDRfix5/doc/tex/cdrbible.tex

[SVN commits to the Asterisk project]

Author: murf
Date: Wed Jul 11 09:01:27 2007
New Revision: 74513

URL: http://svn.digium.com/view/asterisk?view=rev&rev=74513
Log:
a small bible addition

Modified:
    team/group/CDRfix5/doc/tex/cdrbible.tex

Modified: team/group/CDRfix5/doc/tex/cdrbible.tex
URL: http://svn.digium.com/view/asterisk/team/group/CDRfix5/doc/tex/cdrbible.tex?view=diff&rev=74513&r1=74512&r2=74513
==============================================================================
--- team/group/CDRfix5/doc/tex/cdrbible.tex (original)
+++ team/group/CDRfix5/doc/tex/cdrbible.tex Wed Jul 11 09:01:27 2007
@@ -155,8 +155,21 @@
 \subsection{Suppressing Asterisk-Generated CDRs}
 \subsection{Gotchas and Complications}
 \subsection{Backend Mappings}
+Here is a short snippet I spotted on IRC, in #asterisk, just this morning. I changed the names.
+\begin{verbatim}
+X: Y, also, can't you use cdr_tds for mssql?
+Y: X: yes that is also possible
+Y: what are the the advantages
+X: 1.it isn't odbc
+Y: X: what is so bad about odbc
+X: odbc is one more level of indirection that can break. plus it's less efficient than native database drivers.
+Y: hmm, I hear you but I actually have used odbc in the past and have only heard about FreeTDS today which leaves me feeling more comfortable using ODBC.
+\begin{end}
+My advise is to use odbc if you can. I don't think Asterisk can handle enough calls per second that
+the advantages of direct database access will be necessary. But if you need to switch databases, you'll
+be glad you did. Plus, the cdr_adaptive_odbc offers some advantages (at the moment) that other
+databases don't offer: complete mappings.
 
 
 
 
-