Hard to compare CF to other technologies without very deep knowledge of these other technologies. However, we all know that version X.0 of CF at least when Java arrived had many problems. With patches some of these were fixed, but not all. For example CF6.1 has a bad memory leak under very heavy load under Sun but is fine with the same load under windows.
TK -----Original Message----- From: Snake [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 6:46 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Reliability Mostly I put it down to JAVA, as CFMX falls over a lot more than CF4/5 did. When ASP causes a problem, IIS tends to die as they are integrated, but then I can't honestly compare the two as 99.9% of the sites we host are CF anyway, so there is hardly anything on the servers to cause ASP to crash the server. Russ -----Original Message----- From: Neil Middleton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 September 2006 23:22 To: CF-Talk Subject: Reliability Bit of an odd one this - but does anyone else find CF a little more "unreliable" than other similar products when using them in day to day use. The only reason I ask is that our CF servers always seem a little more unstable than some of our other servers running things such as ASP.NET or Ruby on Rails. CF just seems to restart itself more than I believe it should. I am the only one? I'm pretty sure our code is fairly sound, and that our servers aren't under too much load. -- Neil Middleton Visit feed-squirrel.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:253206 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
