Hi, Tom... long time since we've seen you on the forum; nice to have to visit again!

I don't think it is ImageGen doing it because there are thousands of sites running 2.2 in umbraco 4.0.2.1. Besides, there is no code to delete anything except temporary files in in the 'cached' folders themselves.

Any chance you've got an action handler or something else going on? Can you reproduce the behavior? Any other image handlers running on the site or server? Do the deleted images have viruses in them that an antivirus program might quarenteen? Or anything in log files (maybe turn on audit logging for a while?)?

Anyone else have any ideas?

cheers,
doug.

Hi Doug,

Thanks for the response. I'm really having trouble trying to figure the source of this error, and as far as I can remember, the only thing which had changed when images started to disappear was a version upgrade from umb 3.0.6 to 4.0.2. It does seem that only images which use imageGen are disappearing, and they are all images which have been uploaded using an upload field as opposed to direct entry into the media section. Maybe the upload field is the culprit, as anywhere where I've used and uploadfield in a document type, I'm likely to have used imageGen because its such a great tool.

There is no anti-virus running on the server, and I don't have any image handlers. Its a very strange problem as the image will upload fine and display in the template initially, but a few days later, the staff member is complaining that the image has disappeared again. I can't replicate this error and I can't understand why the image would upload successfullly and display for a seemingly random amount of time before being deleted.

It seems likely that this image mystery is a symptom of a larger problem with our install. Our site seemed to suffer a performance degradation since upgrading to umb v4. We have an AMS sharing the application pool which I've integrated with our umbraco install through a lot of web controls - this also complicates finding the root of performance issues as the application is huge. We also have a very large number of nodes on our site, 15k or so.

Lucene is also definitely an issue with our site. The index crashed constantly when I tried to use umbSearch as the main search tool, and the server logs complain of missing files on every publish. I would love to disable Lucene entirely...

Suggestions on all fronts are much appreciated.

Tom

Yeah, sounds a bit strange. One question... is the original image actually removed from the filesystem, or is the image locked and not readable by ImageGen (and therefore seems as though it is missing)?

Regarding the lucene issue... take a look at a new umbraco/lucene implementation called Umbraco Examine. This will be the codebase to be integrated into umbraco 4.1. Lucene can certainly handle the job but the base implementation we've used for a few years is a bit weak in some areas.

Those are the ideas for now. Keep us posted and I'll let you know if I think of any other crazy ideas ;)

cheers,
doug.

@Tom: I also have lots of troubles with Lucene (I suspect it can't handle mine load balanced config...) so I figured out how to (sort of) disable it: I wrote an event handler that cancels each BeforeAddToIndex event:

public class disbleIndexing : ApplicationBase
{
 
 public disbleIndexing()
  {
 
      Document.BeforeAddToIndex += new Document.IndexEventHandler(Document_BeforeAddToIndex);
 }
 
  static void Document_BeforeAddToIndex(Document sender, AddToIndexEventArgs e)
   {
     e.Cancel = 
true;
    }
}
 

Err.. sorry for the mess:

    public class disbleIndexing : ApplicationBase
    {
        public disbleIndexing()
        {
            Document.BeforeAddToIndex += new Document.IndexEventHandler(Document_BeforeAddToIndex);
        }
        static void Document_BeforeAddToIndex(Document sender, AddToIndexEventArgs e)
        {
            e.Cancel = true;
        }
    }

Marco

Andrea - this describes exactly what is happening THANK YOU! We have a newsletter and the editor has been copying stories each week as a starting point.

How did you work around this issue, did you switch the upload control or have the editor modify their procedure (my editor is very cranky about that prospect).

Tom

Doug & Marco-

Thanks for the lucene input. I'd seen reference to umbraco examine in a few posts and I hope to give that a try when I can get a moment. I'd really love to expand our indexing but I've never had success with lucene...

Tom

Tom,

glad that it helped. Our editors modified their procedure without complaining. Basically the new policy is to never check that check box (with the side effect of having some orphan crap on the media folder).

For now this is ok, it's not a severe issue and not a priority for us to fix/change. I believe though that this should be somewhat changed in Umbraco. I mean, on copy, the system should also copy the images/files/assets and update the paths accordingly.

Tell your cranky editor to behave :)

cheers

Andrea

is working on a reply...