[Asterisk-Users] app_queue, fewestcalls and leastrecent logic

McAughan, Matt MMcAughan at synhrgy.com
Tue Aug 12 05:30:54 MST 2003 

Most idle or longest idle should have nothing to do with how long your last
call was, or total call time. Longest idle is supposed to be the agent who
has been sitting there the longest since the last call was taken. 

Now if your an agent that gets the 5 minute calls well then your just the
lucky one. Or someone needs to tell your friends to stop calling! If your
taking 3 hour calls someone needs to teach the agent how to wrap things up
and close the sell, or again tell your friends to stop calling! ;)

But with longest idle at least everyone gets an equal amount of "off the
phone" time, not an equal amount of "on the phone" time.

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Lyman
To: asterisk-users at lists.digium.com
Sent: 8/12/03 1:29 AM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] app_queue, fewestcalls and leastrecent logic

ok and what happens when agentA in on a 3 hour call? once again i think 
this type of 'senario' should be covered by 'in house' policy.. not some

super queue tweek <G>

Brian West wrote:

>Ok just had my boss point something out:
>
>"I'd think dumping calls on most-idle would be fairly straightforward,
but
>could be skewed if agentA is on a 40 minute call, agentB has a bunch of
5
>minute calls"
>
>So total call time should be counted in the logic somewhere.
>
>bkw
>
>On Sun, 10 Aug 2003, Brian West wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I think we are starting to see what type of logic people are wanting
in
>>fewestcalls and leastrecent strategy.
>>
>>bkw
>>
>>On Sun, 10 Aug 2003, Richard Lyman wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>i disagree, instead of thinking 'fallback' how about 'order' the
agents
>>>(by effecting the 'metric') so you 'target' the agent you want first
>>>then if fail they go right to the next one in the 'ordered' list.
>>>
>>>Brian West wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>leastrecent suffers the same fait as fewestcalls onlying ringing the
>>>>leastrecent agent over and over endlessly.  It should have a
fallback
>>>>option.
>>>>
>>>>roundrobin with leastrecent first
>>>>roundrobin with fewestcalls first
>>>>
>>>>I would like to see a roundrobin with leastbusy first option.
>>>>(just because you have taken less call or leastrecent doesn't mean
you
>>>>haven't been a busy agent!)
>>>>
>>>>I'm sure better autologoff logic as per my first email would be a
great
>>>>idea also.
>>>>
>>>>bkw
>>>>
>>>>On Sun, 10 Aug 2003, Richard Lyman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>well if you ask me, the leastrecent part would work if you reversed
the
>>>>>logic on the metric.
>>>>>
>>>>>my other last_used mod would do a time_t on that agent the last
time it
>>>>>was 'tried' (ast_request'd) then (i was using arrays) qsort so that
(new
>>>>>agents) '0' would be on top, and the agent that got the most recent
>>>>>attempt would be on the bottom '1057174447' (below is an example)
>>>>>
>>>>>   -- sorted agent array: 317 last_used: 0
>>>>>   -- sorted agent array: 318 last_used: 0
>>>>>   -- sorted agent array: 319 last_used: 0
>>>>>   -- sorted agent array: 300 last_used: 1057174447
>>>>>
>>>>>that way, (for leastrecent anyway), you are always working with a
full stack of agents.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Brian West wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>First of all I would like to thank Mark for getting roundrobin to
go
>>>>>>roundrobin.  Good job.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Now we have some options here for leastrecent and fewestcalls
strategy. It
>>>>>>needs some work on the logic and Mark recommend that I ask the
list and
>>>>>>get some input before he makes any changes to it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>fewestcalls from what I have seen would always ring the agent with
the
>>>>>>fewestcalls first then go into roundrobin if that agent didn't
answer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Next new caller would ring fewestcalls agent first then start
roundrobin.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What do you think should happen in fewestcalls?  Right now it just
rings
>>>>>>the agent with the fewestcalls over and over with current
app_queue logic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>leastrecent from what I have been looking at will ring the agent
that has
>>>>>>least recently take a call first then if they don't answer go into
>>>>>>roundrobin.  Then the next new call coming from queue would first
go to
>>>>>>the leastrecent first then try every agent in roundrobin till
answered
>>>>>>then starting over again.  New caller from queue hits leastrecent
agent
>>>>>>first.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Same thing happens in leastrecent strategy. The leastrecent agent
will
>>>>>>ring over and over with current app_queue logic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Now some of you might recommend autologoff options.  But that also
might
>>>>>>need some work.  I don't want to log off an agent for not
answering the
>>>>>>phone only once.  So here is how I would like to see autologoff
work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Example:
>>>>>>queue timeout = 20
>>>>>>agent autologoff = 60
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The agent would have to not answer their phone 3 times in a row to
get
>>>>>>logged off.  As it stands now they did not answer just once and
get logged
>>>>>>off.  Thus allow for an employee to use the excuse for not working
when
>>>>>>they should be logged in and taking calls.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Unless i'm wrong here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Please post your input on these options and how you would like
them to see
>>>>>>them function function.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>>Brian
>>>>>>CWIS Internet Services
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
>>>>>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
>>>>>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
>>>>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
>>>>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
>>>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
>>>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
>>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
>>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>
>>    
>>
>_______________________________________________
>Asterisk-Users mailing list
>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>
>  
>

_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Users mailing list
Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20030812/8216fc26/attachment.htm

More information about the asterisk-users mailing list