list  

Re: [DFW CFUG] Variable scopes in CF Enterprise 8

Chris Jordan
Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:34:37 -0700

Well, I finally found it, but it took long enough! :o)

Here's the link to the CF-Talk thread I started.

http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53556

Chris


On 10/19/07, Chris Jordan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Steven,
>
> I also posted these questions to CF-Talk, and I got some responses there.
> I'll search through the archives and get you the url to that thread.
>
> Chris
>
> On 10/19/07, Steven Van Gemert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >  Joe & Eric,
> >
> > Thanks for your input. I welcome any other ideas as well. I'm beginning
> > to understand this...
> >
> > Joe, you pointed me to the question from Chris Jordan... well, Chris and
> > I work together! This issue is for the same client, and so I have the same
> > questions he had (which he put very well). We didn't get exact answers to
> > some of them, and I added a few, maybe you guys can help us again.
> >
> > 1. Can you use the CF Standard edition with the three tiered
> > architecture?
> >
> > 2. Joe, you stated (in the other thread) that a professional CF
> > consultant recommended eliminating the middle tier, and putting the CF
> > application server on the same box as the webserver. Well, that is what we
> > are doing now, and they want to go to the three tiered architecture for
> > security reasons (you know, put the linux webserver in the DMZ, and if some
> > hacker gets in and blows it up, big deal, we put another in - at least the
> > CF server is safe). That's their idea. I want to know if that is sound? Why
> > would that consultant say to go with them on one box, if you sacrifice
> > security (at least, in my clients eyes) to do it?
> >
> > 3. Joe, again in that other thread you've said that JRun should be
> > avoided because it is old and has not had any patches in 2 years. You mean
> > the software JRun, and not the jrun.exe that my current CF server runs
> > on, correct?
> >
> > 4. I still do not understand the J2EE application server. Is that the
> > only way to deploy CF in a three-tiered load-balanced environment where the
> > webserver and the application server are separate boxes? Can that not be
> > done with CF installed as a service on Windows? If not, do we have to buy
> > JRun (or WebSphere or WebLogic, or get JBoss for free) to run it? (Pardon my
> > ignorance - I am willing to learn)
> >
> > 5. Will my current structures that I store in the server and application
> > and session scopes cease to work as I expect if we switch to the
> > three-tiered architecture (and have everything configured correctly)? I know
> > you don't know how I've coded things for my programs, but is there even a
> > way to code these variables such that switching to the three-tiered
> > environment will ruin those variables? Have they figured out all those
> > inherent problems?
> >
> > Any answers you can provide would be much appreciated, even if you can
> > only answer one of them! Thanks all!
> > Steven Van Gemert
> >
> > Joe Kelly wrote:
> >
> > There was a discussion started by Christopher Jordan entitled "CF8
> > Enterprise" which various opinions were shared.  Mine was that you
> > should allow the load balancer to handle your clustering as the
> >
> > overhead is high for the servers to handle the clustering themselves.
> > Go to http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/
> >
> > and search Christopher Jordan CF8 Enterprise
> > Thanks,
> > Joe Kelly
> >
> > On 10/19/07, Eric Knipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >  CF8 offers some improvements in this area.  Previous releases of CF would 
> > do
> > session replication (if you turned it on) but this was limited to simple
> > data types, arrays, and structures.  If you followed OO "best practices" you
> >
> > would be up a creek as CFC's would not be replicated.  However, in CF8,
> > CFC's will be replicated as well, so you really don't need to use sticky
> > sessions.  Sticky sessions should be avoided as they create a single point
> >
> > of failure for the users "stuck" to the server(s) in question.
> >
> >
> > On 10/19/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >  Have you tried the CF-TALK forum at houseoffusion.com ?  It's arguably the
> >
> >  best CF forum out there.
> >
> >  My limited understanding of your situation is that when a user gets routed
> >
> >  to a specific machine on their first request and that session is maintained
> > on that machine.  The key is to match session timeouts of your CF server and
> > your load-balancing box.  If you match those timeouts, then you shouldn't
> >
> > run into issues because once the CF session times out, if the user tries
> > another request and they are routed to a different server, then it's okay
> > that their session scope doesn't exist there since their CF session already
> >
> > timed out as well.
> >
> >  We have a content switch and have "sticky sessions" enabled on it (so the
> >
> >  user stays on whichever box they are first routed to) and set to 4 hours,
> > and then we have session timeout in our app in CF set to 4 hours as well.
> > This solves our problem when everything is up, but right now, if one server
> >
> > goes down, and a user was working on it, and the content switch sends them
> > to another server because the server they were on is unavailable, they DO
> > lose their session and have to log in again.  Not a perfect environment, but
> >
> > works for what we need it for.
> >
> >  Dave
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> >
> >  On Behalf Of Steven Van Gemert
> >
> >  Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:30 AM
> > To: DFW CFUG
> > Subject: [DFW CFUG] Variable scopes in CF Enterprise 8
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have a question that one of you with experience with CF Enterprise will
> >
> >        probably know off the top of your head. Although I've worked in CF 
> > for 7
> > years now, I've only ever used the Standard edition, and I am unsure about
> > exactly how clustering works in the Enterprise edition.
> >
> >      In a clustering/load-balancing/fail-over environment, how
> >
> >  are the various variable scopes handled? Do you have to do something 
> > special
> > to make session variables available? What about application and server
> > variables? They're all stored in RAM, so I thought they must be limited to
> >
> > one machine only, and that requests should come in to that same machine. I
> > even thought I saw a post at one time where you could download a particular
> > script or patch or something that shares session variables to the other
> >
> > computers in the cluster - is that all necessary, and if so, does it work?
> >
> >  Hopefully you can see what I mean. I'm just trying to see what code
> >
> >  changes might be required to our programs when we switch from CFMX 6.1 over
> > to CF Enterprise 8. If you think you have any answers for me about this or
> > other topics regarding upgrade problems that you can put into just a couple
> >
> > of sentences, or can point me to a good forum thread that covers this, then
> > please let me know.
> >
> >  TIA
> > Steven Van Gemert
> >
> > P.S. I have searched forum messages for this answer, and have been
> >
> >  unsuccessful. I'm hoping to get something from you guys I can tell my
> > client. :)
> >
> >  _______________________________________________
> > Reply to DFWCFUG:
> >  List@list.dfwcfug.org
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >  http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list
> > List Archives:
> >     http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/
> >   http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/
> > DFWCFUG Sponsors:
> >  www.instantspot.com/
> >   www.teksystems.com/
> >
> >
> >        _______________________________________________
> > Reply to DFWCFUG:
> >   List@list.dfwcfug.org
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >   http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list
> > List Archives:
> >     http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/
> >   http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/
> > DFWCFUG Sponsors:
> >   www.instantspot.com/
> >   www.teksystems.com/
> >
> >
> >      _______________________________________________
> > Reply to DFWCFUG:
> >   List@list.dfwcfug.org
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >   http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list
> > List Archives:
> >     http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/
> >
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/
> > DFWCFUG Sponsors:
> >   www.instantspot.com/
> >   www.teksystems.com/
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Reply to DFWCFUG:
> >  List@list.dfwcfug.org
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >  http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list
> > List Archives:
> >     http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/
> >   http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/
> > DFWCFUG Sponsors:
> >  www.instantspot.com/
> >   www.teksystems.com/
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://cjordan.us




-- 
http://cjordan.us
_______________________________________________
Reply to DFWCFUG: 
  List@list.dfwcfug.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe: 
  http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list
List Archives: 
    http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/             
  http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/
DFWCFUG Sponsors: 
  www.instantspot.com/
  www.teksystems.com/