> I've seen some strange behavior with <cfstoredproc>, and our DBA has > requested that we don't use it. If you trace your database (tested on > sql2k), you will see cfstoredproc creates and compiles a procedure, > calls that procedure a number of times (depending on how many recordsets > you are expecting), then destroys the temp proc. For this reason, you > will have degraded performance on <cfstoredproc> than you will calling a > stored procedure from a <cfquery> block. Can I see any stats you have backing this up or the steps you took. I'd like to test it out more. Thanks > We've seen the same behavior with client variables, so we don't use them. DB based client vars? I've been using them for a long time with no performance problems (that I've seen). > It's also my understanding that <cfquery> with <cfqueryparam> values can > be as fast as stored procedures. The benefit, of course, comes when the > SQL statements you are running are large enough to effect bandwidth > between the web and database servers. You'll get some delay when you > have to write 200 lines of SQL to your DB, vs 3 or 4 using a stored > procedure. What of a CFQUERY call to a SP where the variables being passed to the SP are written using the CFQUERYPARAM? Have you tried this?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:188461 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
