We used the first method. We tested 3 of the values (low, mid and high). We found that they all had the same impact on performance. So, as per the recommendation in the article, we used the lowest number (8192). One page in particular went from average of 18 seconds to 3 seconds. That page returns a product list that is about 400k in size. In general, it seemed that the larger the page, the bigger the performance hit without that setting.
Ben Rogers http://www.c4.net v.508.240.0051 f.508.240.0057 > -----Original Message----- > From: Howie Hamlin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 12:00 PM > To: CF-Server > Subject: Re: Linux vs Windows for CF Server? > > Ben, > > The Microsoft KB lists two methods for fixing this issue. Which method > did you use and, if you used the first method, what memory setting did you > use? > > Thanks, > > Howie > > --- On Friday, April 01, 2005 9:26 AM, Ben Rogers scribed: --- > > > > > > However, it wasn't always the developer's fault. Many of pages were > > hit hard > > by the performance issue documented in the following TechNote: > > > > > > http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=tn_19588 > > > > That TechNote was only published a few months ago. > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Get Instant Hacker Protection, Virus Detection, Antispam & Personal Firewall. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=62 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:10:5310 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/10 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:10 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.10 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
