Not sure I understand your comment about Tomcat... It is a J2ee server isn't it? why would it be mix and match?
Regards Andrew. On 4/27/06, Denny Valliant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It was for me. It is because I write poor code, but none the less, > the j2ee install was much more stable than the stand alone. > > Before the server would crash hard when the going got rough, > but with the J2EE install, it just gets sluggish 9 out of 10 times. > > I still manage to make it crash and burn, of course, but it does > seem a little harder. > > Just my experience, apparently unmatched. Take it for WIW. > :) > > Although I'd think twice about tomcat... not that it's a bad idea - > I rather like mixing and matching - but if you're aiming for stable, > you should probably avoid the experimental. > Not that *I* would, but a prudent person... p-: > > On 4/26/06, Andrew Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi. > > > > We have been having some reliability issues with CF recently and where > > wondering if it was more reliable/stable if it was run over a J2EE server > > instead in server configuration mode? We would be looking at deploying it > > using Tomcat. Any thoughts? > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:239068 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
