>Doesn't cfcache >accomplish this? Or does your content management system compile and publish >the static cfm files on the Web site?
The latter. The cms publishes a physical static page that has nothing but html in it and a .cfm extension. This can be done versus a .html extension for the simplest of reasons: so a user's session doesn't expire. If you get fancy you can refine the process so that sections of the page remain 'live' CF, thereby reducing the CF load but preserving your ability to run code. It all depends on your app design, but either way 'going static' will dramatically reduce server load. In this case cfcache may or may not be the right tool for the job. You'd have to test it to see if shifting the load from CFPoint A to CFPoint B solved the problem acceptably. -------------------------------------------- Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com -------------------------------------------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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
