New to the List. Wanted to know if anyone has successfully ported ColdFusion MX to Mac OS X, and knows how to get it done. I've read the O'Reilly articles about it, but the third and final article that has the meat of how to do it is yet to be published.
Anyone? On 7/27/02 10:39 PM, "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > CF-Talk-list Sat, 27 Jul 2002 Volume 1 : Number 158 > > In this issue: > > MX Crashing _MAYBYE_ solved WAS: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > Re: MX Crashing _MAYBYE_ solved WAS: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > RE: MX Crashing _MAYBYE_ solved WAS: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > Re: MX Crashing _MAYBYE_ solved WAS: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > RE: MX Crashing _MAYBYE_ solved WAS: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > RE: MX Crashing _MAYBYE_ solved WAS: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > RE: MX Crashing _MAYBYE_ solved WAS: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > Re: CF and Quickbooks integration? > RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > Fwd: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > RE: CF and Quickbooks integration? > Re: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > OT: problems with SSL and host-headers > CGI.HTTP_REFERER > Re: CGI.HTTP_REFERER > RE: CGI.HTTP_REFERER > Re: CGI.HTTP_REFERER > RE: problems with SSL and host-headers > Re: OT: problems with SSL and host-headers > Re: CGI.HTTP_REFERER > cfmx service fails on startup > RE: CGI.HTTP_REFERER > Session Woes > CFMX and logging > Re: CFMX and logging > Re: cfmx service fails on startup > RE: Session Woes > RE: Session Woes > Re: If statement > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 13:38:40 -0400 > From: "Chad Gray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: MX Crashing _MAYBYE_ solved WAS: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > Message-ID: <000f01c23594$7232f7d0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I may have to eat my own words. I think I found the problem with my > crashes. > > You guys got me thinking about some of the code I had been writing for > the current applications we are working on. > > They all had one thing in common and that is a CFX application we have > been using. > > I commented out this CFX application and I can't get the server to crash > _yet_. Im going to start pounding the serve with XENU and see what I > can get. > > Anyone else have a load testing utility I can try? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stacy Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 11:22 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > > I don't think it's "essential" to optimize for mx but there are > opportunities to do so that's for sure. > > If it's a bug and the system can't scale under a certain condition then > I'd > agree to raise hell....on the other hand if it's a specific operation(s) > or > environment issue that causes the anomaly then maybe it can be fixed via > an > optimization. > > Now you certainly won't hear this from MM Sales but truth be told that > if > you want to move your production system to a 1.0 release then you *must* > account for the possibility of environment issues no matter how remote. > > I wish it were so but it's not always black and white...we each operate > in a > unique environment.... > > If it helps any I'm interested in helping you track down the cause... > > Cheers, > > Stace > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chad Gray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 12:03 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > > Todd, great post, but how do we learn to optimize for MX? Trial and > error? You can write crappy slow code in any language, but a few hits > as to how to optimize for MX sure would be nice. > > I guess we need to find out from Joe what kind of code he has written > for that test he posted. How complicated is it? Is it Fusebox? What > kind of database? Are there certain pages that seem to be taking > extremely long amounts of time to process? > > > My personal problem with MX is stability under load. 10+ service > crashes per day on two development servers, but that is another story > and one that a fellow from MM started helping me try to figure out, but > I have not heard from him in a week. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 10:42 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > > "The content/app was written for CF4.5..." > > Again, it might be time to start thinking about streamlining for MX. > I'm > *glad* you tested your application, at least I hope these specs below > are > not coming from your production server. However, this shouldn't be your > > source of frustration. This should be groundwork for you to build a > case > and present to your boss, "Hey Boss, we've got some work to do, check > this > out..." > > MX is new (should be considered 1.0 for all intent and purposes of a > total > rewrite of an existing application). MX is the future (sorry to say it, > > but ... I think the rest of the world is moving forward with or without > you). A proper sweep through the "Content/app written for CF4.5" should > be > done to identify the bottle necks, move some of the logic to .cfc's, > etc. Have you written one application geared towards CFMX yet? Have > you > seen the speed? I think that once you've written _1_ application (heck, > > develop more than one, we encourage it!) geared towards CFMX, you'll see > > what the rest of us are seeing and I think you'll be pleased with the > results (as the rest of us are). > > Please don't take this email personally. This isn't hammering YOU > (except, > you need to calm down some and get back to reality instead of swearing > and > pointing fingers about it all). I think the biggest problem I've seen > so > far is the "branding" of ColdFusion 5. They went from CF4.5.2 to CF5 > > and didn't realize that they can safely bring their 4.5 apps into CF5 > and > get such a huge speed burst without rewriting any of their crappy > coding. > > CFMX is a different animal, as their has been several discussions that > proper care, education and planning will be needed when approaching > CFMX. Granted, some of us out here are still learning it all... some of > us > out here have had the advantage of being a beta tester and are pretty > much > up to speed, but ... even I'm finding *NEW* things inside CFMX that I > haven't found or played with yet. > > ~Todd > > At 11:17 AM 7/27/2002 -0400, you wrote: >> Todd, >> This was my original post. All of this testing was for the > same >> content. >> Simulated 50 concurrent users on CFMX = average 85% CPU on > 750Mhz >> DUAL P3 Processor >> Simulated 50 concurrent users on CF5.0 = average 12% CPU on >> 600Mhz Single P3 Processor >> >> The content/app was written for CF4.5 and we didnt write any > CF5.0 >> optimized code. >> Joe > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide > more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 19:43:52 +0200 > From: Jochem van Dieten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: MX Crashing _MAYBYE_ solved WAS: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Chad Gray wrote: >> I may have to eat my own words. I think I found the problem with my >> crashes. >> >> You guys got me thinking about some of the code I had been writing for >> the current applications we are working on. >> >> They all had one thing in common and that is a CFX application we have >> been using. >> >> I commented out this CFX application and I can't get the server to crash >> _yet_. Im going to start pounding the serve with XENU and see what I >> can get. >> >> Anyone else have a load testing utility I can try? > > Post the URL :) > > Jochem 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
