Additionally, that doesn't compile pages outside of the webroot. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Everland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 1:58 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: It's official: CFMX is 10% faster than CF5 > > True, but he was also talking about a development machine, on a production > enviroment that will help him. Also that would help him if he edits a lot > of > pages, he could just run that batch file and all the pages he changed > would > be compiled. So that's a 50% solution. > > Robert Everland III > Web Developer Extraordinaire > Dixon Ticonderoga Company > http://www.dixonusa.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 4:48 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: It's official: CFMX is 10% faster than CF5 > > > That doesn't address his complaint. He still has to wait for ColdFusion to > recompile his templates every time he modifies them. > > Matt Liotta > President & CEO > Montara Software, Inc. > http://www.montarasoftware.com/ > V: 415-577-8070 > F: 415-341-8906 > P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robert Everland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 1:31 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: It's official: CFMX is 10% faster than CF5 > > > > Here is a way to pre compile your pages. Call the file MX, then MX > > c:\inetpub\wwwroot\whatever > > > > @setlocal > > set NEO_INSTALL=c:\cfusionMX > > set PATH=%NEO_INSTALL%\runtime\bin;%PATH% > > java -classpath %NEO_INSTALL%\lib\cfusion.jar > coldfusion.tools.Compiler > > -webroot %NEO_INSTALL%\wwwroot %* > > @endlocal > > > > Robert Everland III > > Web Developer Extraordinaire > > Dixon Ticonderoga Company > > http://www.dixonusa.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alex Hubner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 4:32 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: It's official: CFMX is 10% faster than CF5 > > > > > > CFMX Performance Brief: CFMX is "only" 10% faster than CF5 under Win2k > > boxes: > > > http://www.macromedia.com/software/coldfusion/whitepapers/pdf/cfmx_perfo > > rmance_brief.pdf > > > > Well, almost everybody knows it in it's day-by-day tests/usages... > > > > I disagree with the tests. CFMX is not 10% faster than CF5... It looks > > that MM doesn't take in consideration the time (very long, specially > > on templates > > that calls lots of includes, such as fusebox ones), to the > just-in-time > > compiler finish it's job (which takes 100% of my CPU)... I've told > once > > and > > I'm gonna say it again: it's a pain in the ass wait CFMX compiles my > > templates everytime I modify it. In a production environment this is > > acceptable but in a development environment is realy bad! It becames > > painless if you use 1Gb processors or faster but... Well, does anybody > has > > the same complain? > > > > []'s > > Alex > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
