Jesse/Sean,
Below are the details of the code that is running slow on CFMX.
Scenario (Problems seen in pages where #NO 1,3,4 exists(CPU average
85-95% ).
1. Data/Content is saved in the database (SQL2k) as a WDDX
See wddxpacket below. Items in the packet are
--------------------------------------
(ALTTAG,BODY,CONTENTITEMID,CONTENTTYPEID,DESCRIPTION,ERRORS,
FILES,KEYWORDS,NAVTEXT,PUBLISHDATE,PUBLISHDAY,PUBLISHMONTH,
PUBLISHYEAR,TITLE,UPLOADIMAGE,UPLOADPDF,USERNAME,VERSIONNUMBER,VERSIONSTATUS
ID
--------------------------------------
2. There is a backend server that creates and populates the CONTENT for
wddxPacket..
"We are NOT concerned with the backend".
3. Custom Tag used to get wddxPacket Data when passed the ContentItemID
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
<cfsetting enablecfoutputonly="Yes">
<!--- Initialize attributes --->
<cfparam name="attributes.ContentItemID" default="">
<cfparam name="attributes.returnStruct" default="">
<!--- Get the content object from the database --->
<cfquery name="qryData" datasource="#Request.DSN#" maxrows="1">
SELECT WDDXPacket FROM ContentVersion
WHERE ContentItemID = #Attributes.ContentItemID#
AND VersionStatusID = 'PUB'
</cfquery>
<cfif qryData.recordcount>
<!--- Deserialize the WDDX Packet --->
<cfwddx action="WDDX2CFML" input="#qryData.WDDXPacket#" output="strTemp">
<cfscript>
// Pass the structure back to the caller
x = Evaluate("caller.#Attributes.ReturnStruct# = strTemp");
// Pass the successful boolean return code
caller.bolReturnCode = 1;
</cfscript>
<cfelse>
<cfset caller.bolReturnCode = 0>
</cfif>
<cfsetting enablecfoutputonly="No">
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
4. Custom Tag Call in the dynamic page when passed
(?ContentItemID=1,..7...,20....)
-------------------------------------
<CF_GetContentItem
ContentItemID="#url.ContentItemID#"
ReturnStruct="strProduct">
-------------------------------------
5.Output Content
-------------------------------------
#strProduct.Title#,#strProduct.BODY# ....
-------------------------------------
6.When we ran other sections of the application WITHOUT any WDDX..
All of them ran ok and scaled quite well.
7. Load Test Results for CF5.0 and CFMX for ABOVE section of code
gave the below results.
CF5.0 CFMX
Win2k Win2k
600 Mhx P3 2(Dual) 750Mhx P3 (NOTE.. Bigger box)
Avg 12% CPU Avg 85%-95% CPU
Any ideas why we are seeing CPU usage shoot up in CFMX?
Joe
****wddxPacket is stored in SQL2K as ntext(16) TYPE and can get upto 2-4
pages long.****
****WDDX in SQL2k saved in one FIELD(WDDXPacket) of the Table
(ContentVersion)*******
<wddxPacket version='1.0'><header></header><data><struct><var
name='ALTTAG'><string>MS Commercial</string></var><var
name='BODY'><string><P>All MS&reg; models are made in the USA to
the highest quality standards.</P><char code='0A'/><P>The
MS&reg; Series grew out of our decades of experience with
Highline<SUP>TM</SUP>, Trimline, and units combined with the
time-proven technologies of The Asian&reg; series. All MS&reg;
models are made in the USA to the highest quality standards. </P><char
code='0A'/><H2>Key Distinguishing Feature</H2><char
code='0A'/><P>North America</P><char code='0A'/><TABLE
cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 width="100%" border=0><char
code='0A'/><TBODY><char code='0A'/><TR><char code='0A'/><TD
class=headerWhite bgColor=#ff6633>Related Links and
Brochures:</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><char
code='0A'/><P><A target=_new
href="http://@url@/pdfs/P1903.pdf">The MS Series - Commercial
(PDF)</A></P></string></var><var
name='CONTENTITEMID'><string>11</string></var><var
name='CONTENTTYPEID'><string>PMP</string></var><var
name='DESCRIPTION'><string>MS Commercial have mechanical non-computing
specifically designed for industrial, and fleet
applications.</string></var><var name='ERRORS'><string></string></var><var
name='FILES'><string>com.jpg,P103.pdf</string></var><var
name='KEYWORDS'><string>, industrial, fleet, north
america</string></var><var
name='NAVTEXT'><string>MS-Commercial</string></var><var
name='PUBLISHDATE'><dateTime>2002-3-7T0:0:0-5:0</dateTime></var><var
name='PUBLISHDAY'><string>07</string></var><var
name='PUBLISHMONTH'><string>3</string></var><var
name='PUBLISHYEAR'><string>2002</string></var><var name='TITLE'><string>The
MS Series - Commercial</string></var><var
name='UPLOADIMAGE'><string>2A2.8_MS_com.jpg</string></var><var
name='UPLOADPDF'><string>P1903.pdf</string></var><var
name='USERNAME'><string>abc></var><var
name='VERSIONNUMBER'><number>42</number></var><var
name='VERSIONSTATUSID'><string>PUB</string></var></struct></data></wddxPacke
t>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:17 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Joe-
I'll weigh in here and try to make it simple:
Q: What is different in WDDX?
A: Everything. Every slice, splice and piece of code. Completely and totally
different.
What is changed in the syntax? Not much.
The question everyone wants to know is: What code are you running that you
are saying is slower than CF5?
Much like the current thread on the loading of the text file: What is the
template you are running that is going slow?
Engineering/Development here in-house cannot fix a bug we cannot define, or
identify.
Saying "WDDX is slow" does nothing. Saying "WDDX translation given X and Y
data is slow vs CF5" helps us more.
This way, a bug can be entered, escalated and a patch can be generated.
Jesse Noller
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Macromedia Server Development
Unix/Linux "special guy"
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:08 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
>
> >
> > OK, that sounds like good progress so maybe we'll all stop ragging on
> you
> > :)
> You havent given out any peformance tests.. other than MM Perf brief
> I am NOT sure...you guys have any performance test for the details we
> are talking about here...What can you expect from developers..?
>
> > Well, it's apples and oranges... in CF5, WDDX2CFML was written in C/C++
> > and now it's completely rewritten in Java. It's just... different code.
> I'
> > m not on the product team so I don't have access to the source.
>
> Repeated... no spec details given. This news was public.. in NEO/Beta
> releases.
> What would be good information is some like... (eg IIF scales differently
> in
> CFMX Vs CF5.0)
>
> SO the question is : Are there any changes/updates made to
> WDDX...in CFMX Vs CF5.0 (regardless of JAVA/C++ engine.. unicode)?
> that can possibly make it run slower (like the COM issue) yet
> Unknown(TESTING).
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sean A Corfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 2:17 PM
> Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
>
>
> > On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 08:54 , Joe Eugene wrote:
> > > I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are
> > > narrowing
> > > it
> > > down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store
> > > that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML..
> >
> > OK, that sounds like good progress so maybe we'll all stop ragging on
> you
> > :)
> >
> > > Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the
> WDDX
> > > parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast
> we
> > > are seeing a pattern here with tests.
> >
> > Hmm, interesting. That should be pretty easy to performance test.
> >
> > > Is it possible that you can find out..
> > > How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX?
> >
> > Well, it's apples and oranges... in CF5, WDDX2CFML was written in C/C++
> > and now it's completely rewritten in Java. It's just... different code.
> I'
> > m not on the product team so I don't have access to the source.
> >
> > > Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful.
> >
> > It's Unicode capable now - but that's just by virtue of it being
> > implemented in Java. As far as I know, there were no specific behavioral
> > changes (except what's in the release notes etc).
> >
> > Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
> >
> > "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
> > -- Margaret Atwood
> >
> >
>
______________________________________________________________________
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
