Open
Conversation
Collaborator
|
I think an output folder is a completely acceptable pattern. Let's go ahead with that approach. @dchristensen do you need to adjust anything before I review the PR? |
Author
|
@MisterJames I'll need to make some changes based on our decision here. If we're going to move the image to a different folder, we'll need a way to access the DB from this function to update references to the blob since we are saving the path to the original blob in the DB. Do we have a way to get to the DB in the functions project yet? |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #3
I've got this working but right now each image that needs processing will always get processed twice. It looks like when we write the resized image back to the Azure blob, it triggers the function a second time, causing each image that requires processing to be processed twice.
@MisterJames do you know a way around this issue? We could put images in separate virtual folders inside the container, but I think that has its own set of issues, including forcing us to process every image, just to copy it to the "processed" folder.