Re: Unique Filename

• To: "Randy Breeser" <Randy.Breeser@xxxxxxxx>
• Subject: Re: Unique Filename
• From: Steve Emmerson <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:11:56 -0700

Randy,

>Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:11:28 -0600
>From: "Randy Breeser" <Randy.Breeser@xxxxxxxx>
>To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Christian_Pag=E9?= <page.christian@xxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Unique Filename

The above message contained the following:

> I may end up piping to another process but I would like to avoid that if 
> at all possible...I would like to handle it through existingLDM methods. 
> Another process may introduce another opportunity for failure and 
> additional support responisibility.

Well... I'm swamped with work at the moment, so I wouldn't wait on me to
modify the LDM software if I were you.

I think that piping the outout to a shell script that creates a unique
output file is the best way to go. I'd have the script append its
process-id to the timestamp-filename. After that, the script could be as
simple as invoking cat(1) (which would make maintenance a snap). I think
I'd also use the "close" option in the associated PIPE entry in the
pqact(1) configuration-file..

Good luck.

Regards,
Steve Emmerson   <http://www.unidata.ucar.edu>

• References:
  • Unique Filename <br>
    • From: Randy Breeser