>> I hope some MM folks have noted this problem & would try to >> come up with a solution. We have done our best to Raise the >> Issue and point it out to the community. The Rest is in the >> hands of MM.. whether they want to solve it OR not.
Um, solve what problem? CF is not the best tool for every job. Neither is Java, C, C++, C#, VB, VB.NET, ASM, and on and on. Some parts of your app should not be written in CF, no one has ever said otherwise. Similarly parts of your app should not be written in Java. No problem to fix there at all. --- Ben -----Original Message----- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 10:44 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Jsp Vs Cfm (CFMX) -- Test Code > always strongly recommended the use of a compiled language for the > "middle tier" - you'd only do presentation logic in ASP, and you'd do > anything of any complexity in COM with either C++ or VB. I suspect > that's a little different with .NET, but I'm not sure how different it > is. FYI... .NET/C#/VB.net gets compiled into MSIL and the runtime runs the code "compiled* not interpreted. Com's in .NET are supposedly slower Classes are the new standard of development. >think that your expectations may not be > realistic, though, considering that CF has to work with the huge >volume of legacy code out there. Microsoft VB code does the same thing (Optional Type declarations) as serveral others pointed out here. > instead of atypical test cases like looping a million times. I think > it's more than equal in its competitiveness with other web application > servers. The fact is, most business apps aren't doing the sorts of > calculations that you're testing If it takes considerably more time for a million loops.... that means it will take more time to run ONE LOOP than the counter Web Application Server/Language. We are doing a million loops here as a CASE/Example...to prove the performance issues and its easier to read the TIME FACTOR.. dont understand why ppl dont get it.. ***if it takes 5 seconds to add 1+1, its going to take 10 seconds to do that TWICE*** We can argue about this all day and still not get anywhere..... What if i had to calculate 50 Miles Radius for 50 concurrent users? Where do u think the code will run faster? Like i said.. there is no point try to prove this whole situation.. unless you are willing to make a fair decision based on FACTS. I hope some MM folks have noted this problem & would try to come up with a solution. We have done our best to Raise the Issue and point it out to the community. The Rest is in the hands of MM.. whether they want to solve it OR not. Joe > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 5:39 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Jsp Vs Cfm (CFMX) -- Test Code > > > > Dave, I hope this is not a Joke!. Are u suggesting to write the > > Presentation logic in CFMX and use C# to write heavy duty business > > components? > > No, not really. I'm suggesting that you write the presentation logic > in CF MX and use Java to write heavy-duty business components, if you > think that the increase in performance is worth it. If you want to > loop a million times, for example, I'd suggest that you write that in > Java. > > It's funny that you mention Windows as an application server. If you > read best practices for "classic" ASP development, from Microsoft or > others, they always strongly recommended the use of a compiled > language for the "middle tier" - you'd only do presentation logic in > ASP, and you'd do anything of any complexity in COM with either C++ or > VB. I suspect that's a little different with .NET, but I'm not sure > how different it is. > > > Hardly Free? Majority of the users are running CF on Windows right? > > I don't know about the majority, but the fact is, a lot of the larger > users are on Unix platforms. Most enterprise deployments don't use > Windows. In fact, I can't remember working on any projects in recent > years that I'd consider enterprise deployments that have used Windows. > Most have used Solaris. > > > Windows 2000 Advanced Server $3999 > > http://shop.microsoft.com/Referral/ProductInfo.asp?siteID=1018 > > 8&typeID=1 > > Microsoft .NET Framework Free > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/default.asp?url=/downloads > > /sample.asp?ur l=/msdn-files/027/001/829/msdncompositedoc.xml > > > > Where is the Cost to add an Web Application Server to Win2K? > > Uh, you've neglected the cost of CALs, which would often be needed in > an intranet environment (if users are authenticated through IIS). > > > *Again* we all love CF and CFMX... but my point is.. CFAS should be > > able to be EQUALLY Competitive/Scale with other Web Application > > Servers.... > > I think it's more than equal in its competitiveness with other web > application servers. The fact is, most business apps aren't doing the > sorts of calculations that you're testing, and I suspect that the > difference between performance when you've got a typical page with > queries and outputs > is minimal. On the other hand, CFML code is a lot easier to debug and > maintain than, say, JSP. I think that your expectations may not be > realistic, though, considering that CF has to work with the huge volume of > legacy code out there. Maybe comparative performance will be improved over > time, but I don't think it's as simple as you might think. I > think it's more > important for MM to focus on the ways that people actually use > the product, > instead of atypical test cases like looping a million times. > > > Why would someone spend $5000 on a software that simply DOESNT Scale > > CORE of his application(Business components) ...again which are > > sequence of calculations, data manipulations... and what not! > > Perhaps because it decreases the cost of writing and maintaining > presentation logic? Five thousand dollars is a trivial amount > considering what most businesses spend on their web infrastructure, > and is easily balanced out by lower development costs - maybe a week > of development time will cover the difference! > > As for data manipulation, I don't know about you, but I've always > favored moving data manipulation logic out of CF entirely. The > database tends to be really good at that, so I'd recommend doing it in > the database. > > Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software > http://www.figleaf.com/ > voice: (202) 797-5496 > fax: (202) 797-5444 > > ::::::::::::: dream :: design :: develop ::::::::::::: > MXDC 02 :: Join us at this all day conference for > designers & developers to learn tips, tricks, best > practices and more for the entire Macromedia MX suite. > > September 28, 2002 :: http://www.mxdc02.com/ > (Register today, seats are limited!) > :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: > > ______________________________________________________________________ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.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
