I should have been clearer, in that the application in question used multiple CFMODULE calls to recursively call the Fusebox core and populate several sections of content. Other than the change from FB3 to FB4 (along with the elimination of the CFMODULEs), no other changes were made to the application. The processing time for an average page in this application dropped from 400 ms to 40 ms when using Fusebox 4 in production mode (a setting in the fusebox.xml file). Obviously, your mileage may vary, but I feel this is a pretty good example of the increase in performance that FB4 can deliver.
>Brian's comparison needs qualification. If a request takes 400ms to render, >but 350 of that was a slow query, then it'll only drop to around 360ms with >FB4. It's only the framework code that is enormously faster, not the >application code. In my experiences, the framework overhead was annoying, >but fairly small (never more than 10-15%) of total execution time. Assuming >that tenfold decrease is valid (it's probably reasonable), you're only >looking at shaving 10% off your total execution time. The point is that FB3 >isn't horribly slower, it's the application that takes most of the time, not >the framework. FB4 is has a lighter weight execution time, but it's a small >difference overall. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
