I've inherited an app that does not lock session variables. The app runs under CF5.0.
Have read cflock best practice for CF5.0. Here are a few questions:
(A) CFLOCK
1) heard that cf5 server and cfmx server handles cflock differently, so, would cflock best pratice for cf5 applicable to cfmx if one day the app upgraded to cfmx?
2) what about this notion of the NAME attribute, that is, a different lock name would differentiate data/value inside a lock (be it read and write when applicable), the analog of gym's lock room. No? with a SAME lock NAME, cf server (5.0/prior and cfmx) would treat each request as students line up to try that SAME lock with each one having a key/request in his/her hand?
3) given the fact that SCOPE and NAME attributes are mutually exclusive,
use one of them would suffice, so, the question is when to use SCOPE and when to use NAME (data integriy number one task, less memory usage second for either preCFMX or CFMX)?
(B) Single Threaded Sessions (CF Admin)
Could we construe that Single Threaded Sessions mechanism is a way that MM designed to overcome the lousy coding of not locking session variables? By that, I mean, so, instead of going through tons of code modification, just apply the "Single Threaded Sessions" to let CF server to handle the locks for data integrity. How well does "Single Threaded Sessions" does this job?
Thank you.
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
