[asterisk-users] How does extensions.lua compares to extensions.conf ?
george.joseph at fairview5.com
Thu Feb 13 00:04:37 CST 2014
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Paul Belanger <paul.belanger at polybeacon.com
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Olivier <oza.4h07 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello,
> > How does extensions.lua compares to extensions.conf or extensions.ael on
> > stability, performance and features ?
> > Would you recommand extensions.lua as an easy/easier way to access
> > memcached, redis or equivalent ?
> > Thoughs ? Comments ?
> The lack of replies should give you your answer. Extensions AEL and
> LUA don't get much action these days, I'm sure there are a few people
> that use them but extensions.conf has way more code coverage from a
> testing POV.
> Your better off using AGI if you want to leverage redis or memcached.
> Actually, I use Lua dialplans in several production systems. Some are
used in conjunction with traditional dialplans and some are the only source
of dialplans. They've always been rock solid. I actually find it easier
to configure even a moderately complex dialplan than the traditional
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the asterisk-users