[Asterisk-Dev] asterisk 'stable'?

[Paul]

Kevin P. Fleming wrote:

> Brian K. West wrote:
>
>> Lets see.  Apache, MySQL, OpenH323 and many more run without issues 
>> and run
>> on a wide variety of systems.   So that argument is totally false.
>
>
> So all of those software packages have never had any issues and were 
> always 'stable'? They never experience any unexpected results or 
> unpredictable behavior? I find that very hard to believe.

Although you might not trigger a core dump you can usually find ways to 
make the latest stable release of those packages do bad things. Whether 
it's sendmail on linux or msexchange, people without the right skills 
shouldn't be doing any config beyond the simple basics. The GUI does not 
solve that problem. It often just makes it harder for a skilled person 
to navigate. I have encountered some win2003 sbs defaults that were 
totally wrong and the quick economical solution was to add a nic to a 
cisco router just for the windows server. If I had the source, what then?

>
> Note that I'm not disagreeing that Asterisk should be as stable as 
> possible... I'm only asking the original poster what he's comparing it 
> to that never has any troubles on his system. Many of us run Asterisk 
> on systems that see very high call volumes and have _zero_ problems 
> that can be attributed to Asterisk at all.

More specifically, what server daemons has the OP configured and to what 
degree beyond the basic defaults?