CFCs are definitely heavier than POJOs, however, much of that's at the class level, not the instance level. If you go look at the generated ..class files, you'll see that a CFC generates a class for the CFC itself, and then another class for each function. So if a given CFC will always require N+1 Java classes, where N is the number of methods on the CFC.
I'm not sure if CFCs share method instances or not. If they do, then there should be little per-instance overhead, as a CFC instance is little more than a couple nested structures. If not, then you're going to be lugging around not only the nested structures, but also instances of each function per CFC instance, which could lead to significant memory usage. However, all that being said, it's an implementation detail that shouldn't really be of concern to developers for two main reasons. First, RAM is so damn cheap, and second, if you really care that much, you should be using POJOs. Java is SO simple to integrate into CF, there's really no excuse to not use it when you have a situation that warrants it. If you find your CFC implementation to be to much of a resource hog, add more memory to alleviate the problem (and keep the CF's hallmark ease-of-use), or switch the objects to POJOs (to get the tighter Java environment), but leave the business logic in CFCs. If you wanted to go for broke testing, it should be relatively straightforward to create a test environment for checking the size of a CFC instance. You just need a really good memory utilization checker for your system (not measured in percent, or MB, but bytes). Initialize all your code, make sure everything's been instantiated and executed. Check memory, create exactly one persistant instance, and check memory again. If you've done a proper job making sure nothing but that instance was created (or have ensured everything else was garbage collected), you'll know how big it is. cheers, barneyb On 7/24/05, Dov Katz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have a cache similar to the cf_scopecache, though my objects can be stored > to file, memory as text, memory as a query, or memory as a cfc. > > I have a gallery cfc which holds an array of photo cfc instances. Real > simple, an id, file path, folder path, and friendly names for both object > types. > > They really helped performance but they seem to hog memory. How much > atypical (not your avg java object) overhead do cfc's add to traditional java > objects, if any? Just trying to make sure I am making the correct > assumptions about CFC's .... > > Thanks > -Dov > -- Barney Boisvert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 360.319.6145 http://www.barneyb.com/ Got Gmail? I have 50 invites. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:212702 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=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
