Difference between revisions of "Ns returnfile"

From AOLserver Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
(Minor clarification.)
Line 18: Line 18:
 
  ns_unlink -nocomplain "/var/tmp/myotherfile"
 
  ns_unlink -nocomplain "/var/tmp/myotherfile"
  
When returning "dynamic" file data like this, a safer practice would be to use [[ns_return]] or ns_returnfp instead.  For example:
+
When returning "dynamic" file data like this, a safer practice would be to use [[ns_return]] or ns_returnfp instead (since they don't use fastpath caching).  For example:
  
 
  set fd [open $myfile]
 
  set fd [open $myfile]

Revision as of 00:55, 20 August 2008

ns_returnfile 200 "application/zip" $filepath
ns_returnfile 200 [ns_guesstype $file] $filepath

Caveat programmor

ns_returnfile uses fastpath caching internally, and fastpath caching may fail to distinguish between two files on the same filesystem which have the same inode, mtime, and size (serving one file in lieu of the other). This can happen if a file is generated, returned to the user, and then deleted. For example, in the following sample code the second call to ns_returnfile will return /var/tmp/myfile rather than /var/tmp/myotherfile:

set file [open "/var/tmp/myfile" "w"]
puts $file "ABC123"
close $file
ns_returnfile 200 text/plain "/var/tmp/myfile"
ns_unlink -nocomplain "/var/tmp/myfile"

set file [open "/var/tmp/myotherfile" "w"]
puts $file "XYZ987"
close $file
ns_returnfile 200 text/plain "/var/tmp/myotherfile"
ns_unlink -nocomplain "/var/tmp/myotherfile"

When returning "dynamic" file data like this, a safer practice would be to use ns_return or ns_returnfp instead (since they don't use fastpath caching). For example:

set fd [open $myfile]
ns_return 200 [ns_guesstype $myfile] [read $fd]
close $fd

Want to name the file returned?

ns_set update [ns_conn outputheaders] content-disposition "attachment; filename=1.abc"