Why not go ahead and use the job number, but when you're about to write the
PDF to disk first check to see if there's already one with that name
(initials and job number). If you find one then delete it, then create the
new one. Is there some audit reason to keep the earlier version?
On Fri, Nov
Sounds like my original response. Check for the file first...
Sent via BlackBerry by ATT
-Original Message-
From: Howard Fore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 09:19:22
To: discussion@acfug.org
Subject: Re: [ACFUG Discuss] Another CFMAIL Problem
Why not go ahead and use the job
I still don't get what it is you think is caching the file. Why not
just delete the PDF as soon as you have emailed it?
-dhs
--
Dean H. Saxe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Nov 8, 2008, at 9:52 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sounds like my original response. Check for the file first...
Sent via
It's just that caching is the only explanation I can think of, and if that's the reason, then deleting the earlier version of the file would do no good if the cached version is what's being sent. On the other hand, I have not verified that indeed the second version is indeed being created, so more
caching would be at the webserver level with respect to this. My guess is
the email gets sent prior to the new PDF being completed. Emails are queued
and file saves involve file system work-time, so things get a bit
asynchronous. Even with unique file naming schems, this can be a issue.
Try the
First things first. What Dean suggested is correct. You first need to look
security wise. Its not a wise idea to leave things sitting there in the open
and waiting for something to happen. Anyway, thats your choice how you
decide to plan your application.
Now to the actual issue, do you have any
What things get asynchronous? If what you say is true, email would
regularly go out without complete attachments. I think you're way off
on this one.
-dhs
--
Dean H. Saxe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Nov 8, 2008, at 5:20 PM, Douglas Knudsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
caching would be at the
I think what he means is that if a recorder creates a file and sends it,
then corrects it and sends again, the recipient could open the first one and
think it is the most current version when it isn't. It wasn't identified as
an issue by Peyton but I could see how it could cause someone an issue.
