On Thursday, Aug 7, 2003, at 10:26 US/Pacific, Dave Watts wrote: >> One "testimonial" worth noting is that as of 7/31, all >> macromedia.com production servers were running entirely >> on CFMX 6.1 as was the Macromedia Intranet. As of 8/1 >> all our macromedia.com QA servers were running CFMX 6.1 >> and as of 8/2 all our macromedia.com development servers >> were running CFMX 6.1. That's a total of 17 instances >> across 12 servers. Each upgrade took only about 30 minutes, >> start to finish and the only glitch was that the upgrades >> did not preserve our web.xml file (so we had to back it >> up manually). > > You started with production, then did QA and development?
No, we'd been upgrading servers repeatedly during the beta and we upgraded one production instance (out of the cluster) to the final version and fully QA'd it one last time before upgrading all the other servers. We were already on the "almost final GMC" on most of the QA servers before that point. My first point was meant to be that we upgraded to CFMX 6.1 from a variety of versions of CFMX ranging from pre-release Updater 3 bits right up to "almost final GMC" 6.1 bits and the upgrades were all smooth and swift. My second point was that CFMX 6.1 is certainly stable enough to power a high traffic site like macromedia.com Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
