CF handles complex variables by reference, but simple variables by value...
So if you want to move a structure out of the application scope you need to
use the duplicate() function and not a direct reference.
e.g.
<CFSET Application.TestStruct = "tructNew()">
<CFSET REQUEST.TestStruct = Application.TestStruct> <!--- This is wrong, not
thread safe --->
<CFSET REQUEST.NewTestStruct = Duplicate(Application.TestStruct)> <!--- Now
it is thread safe --->
<CFSET Application.TestVal = 1>
<CFSET REQUEST.TestVal = Application.TestVal> <!--- Where as this is thread
safe as it's a simple var. --->
Ben.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Evan Lavidor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 20 December 2000 15:52
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: LOCKING revisited...
>
>
> Are you saying that if I do the following:
>
> <cflock scope="application" timeout="30" type="readonly">
> <cfset variables.myvariable = application.myvariable>
> </cflock>
>
> and then later on down the page I do the following:
>
> <cfif variables.myvariable GT 10>
> do something
> </cfif>
>
> then I haven't solved the locking "issue"? I thought that by setting my
> application variables to local variables within a lock, I could now
> reference the local variables with abandon and not have to worry about
> locking any more. Is this not the case?!?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Evan
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Peter Theobald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 10:21 AM
> > To: CF-Talk
> > Subject: RE: LOCKING revisited...
> >
> >
> > No offense, but that is nonsense.
> > My Cold Fusion server is still multi-threaded and
> > multi-processed. It is still handling every incoming request at
> > the same time.
> > The only time it will act "single threaded" is when two requests
> > attempt to read an Application scope variable at the same time.
> > And guess what? That is exactly the same thing that will happen
> > if you DONT use automatic read locking, but properly use <CFLOCK>
> > around your Application variables.
> >
> > Automatic read locking doesn't lock the entire page request,
> > (which would be single threading the entire server). It locks
> > read access around those variables that need it.
> >
> > This is not just an academic issue for me. I have a site running
> > with 10-100 reads from an Application structure on every page. To
> > make the code more readable, I am using automatic read locking
> > for Application scope variables instead of
> > <CFLOCK>#Application.myvar#</CFLOCK> tens or hundreds of times on
> > each page.
> >
> > On a related note, if I have automatic read locking enabled for
> > Application scope and I assign a local Variable to an Application
> > variable, it will essentially make a copy to the pointer. Is CF
> > smart enough then to automatically lock accesses to this local
> > Variables, which is pointing into Application space?
> >
> > < !--- automatic read locking is ON for Application variables --->
> > < cfset myvar = Application.bigvar>
> > < cfoutput> #myvar# </cfoutput> < !--- <<<=== IS THIS
> > AUTOMATICALLY LOCKED?? --->
> >
> > At 02:13 PM 12/19/00 -0700, Richard Kern wrote:
> > >It was expressed before that turning this on via the server will
> > essentially
> > >drop your application to single thread mode, slowing down all
> > responses from
> > >the system. Remember that CF is server side so doing this is
> > like knocking
> > >on the door and opening it for each request and then closing it before
> > >anyone else enters, no matter how many people are queued at the door.
> > >
> > >Richard Kern
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Peter Theobald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > >Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 1:16 PM
> > >To: CF-Talk
> > >Subject: LOCKING revisited...
> > >
> > >
> > >Ok, given that we all agree:
> > >
> > >** Access to shared variables should *ALWAYS* be locked **
> > >
> > >Then why on Earth shouldn't I just turn on Automatic Read Locking for
> > >Application (and Session et al if I use them) scope and only
> worry about
> > >write locking in my code?
> > >
> > >Why doesn't everyone do that, with the rare exception of some
> > code that has
> > >unusual locking needs.
> > >
> > >I've heard the argument that automatic read locking is a slight
> > performance
> > >hit. It couldn't be more of a hit than parsing <cflock>
> </cflock> around
> > >every access and still doing the read lock anyway!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-----------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------
> > >Peter Theobald, Chief Technology Officer
> > >LiquidStreaming http://www.liquidstreaming.com
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >Phone 1.212.545.1232 x204 Fax 1.212.545.0938
> > >
> > >To put this contact information into your Palm device, click here:
> > >http://www.coola.com/cgi-bin/addinfo.cgi?pid=15803&rid=972879910&type=A
> > >
> >
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
