Actually I would be interested to hear what the problems you have with cfhttp are.
(it was prolly already sent ot the list, yes, but I tend to skim threads) Jesse Noller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Macromedia Server Development Unix/Linux "special guy" > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 2:51 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: It's official: CFMX is 10% faster than CF5 > > 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. > >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. 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
