cfhttp is a pos? Whats a pos?
At 02:51 PM 26/07/02 -0400, you wrote:
>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
