Oh! Atleast according to the documention in Adobe website, if you use the
'spoolEnable' = false in CFMAIL or use the CF administrator's Mail settings
to disable spooling altogether, the page that sends out the email, should
atleast try to send out the email immediately and, give you out an
: Oh! Atleast according to the documention
in Adobe website, if you use the: spoolEnable
= false in CFMAIL or use the CF administrators
Mail settings to: disable spooling
altogether, the page that sends out the email,
should: atleast try to send out
the email immediately and, give you out
:The only connection issue you're going to troubleshoot this way is between
the CF server and your own SMTP server, :as defined in the CF Administrator.
The SMTP server receives the message from CF, spools it, and then tries to
deliver :it to the recipient's mailserver. This process may or may not
Since quite a bit of servers fail to deliver silently (i.e. I allow
all unknown users to fail to /dev/null) just tracking the bounced
emails is not going to give you an accurate measure of the success
rate, only the rate of bounced messages.
Email is never guaranteed, so don't treat it as
Mischa,
I have verified that this is the case with this IIS entry as per your
instructions but it did not fix the error. Any other suggestions?
Troy Jones
Dynapp Support Team
678-528-2952
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mischa
Uppelschoten ext 10
Troy,
Was this chart working before and suddently stopped? Is this a result of some
sort of upgrade or migration?
I Don't know what version of IE you have, but there have been issues with IE
6.0.28 (SP1) not reading flash properly. Sometimes, IE simply will not display
the flash chart no
Sometimes I've seen this happen when the /cfide/ mapping is not setup
properly or not visible by the browser. I don't recall the specifics,
but I think it may use a .js file that's in the CFIDE for some of the
Flash embed code. That would cause the browser to miss the chart, but
no CF error
Thanks for your suggestions.
Although none of them panned out, I did find a site running similar code
on our dev box, so I ripped the snippet and put it in where the
malfunctioning call was happening. The only difference between the two
instances was the name attribute assigned to the faulty one.
