I got a tip previously on cf-talk that advised me to do this in my
application.cfm:
<!--- Page By Page Session Variables --->
<CFIF IsDefined("Session.Collections")>
<cflock scope="session" type="readonly" timeout="20">
<cfset request.session = duplicate(session)>
</cflock>
</CFIF>
<!--- Page By Page Application Variables --->
<cflock scope="application" type="readonly" timeout="20">
<cfset request.application = duplicate(application)>
</cflock>
Is this good or bad? (My sites typically have between 10 and 200
connections.)
>
>Sean A Corfield wrote:
> > On Sunday, Jan 12, 2003, at 13:23 US/Pacific, Matt Robertson wrote:
> >
> >>I have yet
> >>to see any instance where locking instituted any noticeable performance
> >>penalty at any level.
> >
> >
> > If you lock within Application.cfm, you will single-thread your
> > application and it will not scale. For low-traffic applications, that
> > may be fine.
>
>I think that is a bit of an oversimplification. Maybe it is a good idea
>to distinguish between readonly and exclusive locks and between
>different scopes.
>But if we are talking performance penalties, single-threaded sessions
>are evil.
>
>Jochem
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
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
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
