In two of my major apps that I've been able to test, both have seen about a 100% increase in page execution with a single user. Even with debugging on. I'm quite happy with the speed. My main beef with MX is the broken COM support, which means that I can't use MSXML, which I use all the time since cfhttp is a pos. So we can't upgrade any servers, and have to wait for a new server to come online to install MX on.
-- Jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, July 26, 2002, 2:18:39 PM, you wrote: twrc> I'm actually wondering if some of the complaint about the 'speed' issue is twrc> what people are noticing when in development. Let's face it, the debugger twrc> application is a hog for whatever it's doing. Every now and then I turn twrc> off the debugger so I can get the real speed of what the end user is going twrc> to see and I think people are forgetting about that. twrc> In a production environment, debugging shouldn't be turned on (in a twrc> perfect world, with the perfect qa environment, etc.). Not all of us are twrc> disappointed with CFMX, but then... I dunno, not all of us is writing twrc> brand new code either. twrc> ~Todd twrc> On Fri, 26 Jul 2002, Jesse Noller wrote: >> The reason why you don't run into this with PHP, ASP, and JSP (actually, I avoid >JSP) is that they are interpreted languages, like the current CFML is sort of, and >the old CF was. >> >> You do get this with Perl. Perl requires compilation time. Actually, some of the >advanced CPAN/Perl/PHP stuff I've done lately does require an App compilation. >> >> The fact of the matter is that while we provide you with CFML, a RAD development >language, which is then interpreted into Java bytecode, we have not left the RAD >ideal, in "my" mind, RAD is a >> style of language that allows you rapid development, NOT taking into account the >deployment of application, rather, I don't believe that we "left" RAD behind due to >JIT time. >> >> While it would be optimal to have all the benefits that we've garnered with CFMX >without the compile time, I believe the benefits we have gained outweigh the extra >10-20 seconds it takes to view a >> source page. You'd get the same thing with Perl. >> >> The CFML language is maturing, that's a fact of life. One of the biggest >limitations facing "RAD" languages such as PHP, or ASP even is the fact that there is >a barrier in their efficiency when >> trying to stick to the interpreted schema. PHP has even realized this. >> >> That's why you have about 10 trillion PHP modules to bypass (or "expand") on the >limitations found in an interpreted language. By moving more towards a traditional >compile approach, we garner >> assets in regards to language expansion and integration, and scalability. >> >> The performance increase *is* noticeable in a production environment. Scalability >is the key. As a general rule, compiled and tuned binaries will almost ALWAYS outrun >and outperform interpreted >> command-driven applications of the same ilk. >> ______________________________________________________________________ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
