On 6/9/07, m g <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2/ My main reason for consider Bluedragon.NET over CFMX is not due to Flash > Remoting but rather to my main concern of .NET touted as being far superior > in handling significant loads and simultaneous requests than CFMX...
Last week I attended the Microsoft TechEd 2007 conference, which is some of the best training you can get, if you ever get the opportunity to attend one of these events. I attended a few sessions on building scalable ASP.NET sites (since I program in both ASP.NET and CF), two led by Jeff Prosise, and one by Richard Campbell, both of whom are amazingly knowledgeable and are regarded as .NET gurus. A main point Jeff stressed is that many ASP.NET developers think ASP.NET is inherently scalable, but the exact opposite is true. Nearly every ASP.NET Web site is not scalable, unless it is specifically programmed to be scalable, or unless the infrastructure surrounding the Web site is set up to be scalable (specialized hardware, distributed load, etc.). The reason most ASP.NET sites are not scalable is the same reason most CF sites are not scalable. It comes down to a limited thread pool and having threads tied up waiting for I/O operations to complete. Jeff reviewed in detail the various ways to make an ASP.NET site scalable using asynchronous handlers, and the code isn't pretty. If you can open up the source code for that .NET Flash Remoting project, do a search for "Async." If you find it, it indicates that the programmers had scalability in mind when they wrote the code. In a separate session, Richard Campbell agreed that writing an ASP.NET site that uses asynchronous handlers is difficult. Richard said that the modifications make the code hard to read and hard to debug. He prefers other techniques of optimizing the infrastructure and distributing the load. I made a high-traffic CFMX Web site scalable using asynchronous threading techniques to manage caching, and it was non-trivial work. However, I did not have the luxury of using the cfthread tag, since it didn't exist at the time. The cfthread tag looks fantastic, and easy to implement. The issue of performance is related to scalability. Both the Microsoft folks and the Blue Dragon folks claim that .NET code on Windows machines executes much faster than Java code. I believe the numbers I remember from MS are 1x for C# translates to 1.5x for Java. It makes sense that MS code would run faster on a MS server using an MS database, so I do believe ASP.NET code would be theoretically faster than Java on a Windows server. I have never seen any objective benchmarks that validate these claims. I do not believe there is a single realistic study comparing the performance of an optimized CFMX site with an optimized ASP.NET site, since I don't know any organization that would invest the time and money needed to accurately replicate and optimize a high-traffic site in two different languages. And no, the My Space redesign is not an example, even though MS likes to claim it is. I am not suggesting that you should avoid ASP.NET, but I think it helps to clear up the common misconception that ASP.NET is inherently more scalable than CFMX. ASP.NET could be faster than CFMX, but performance is a different issue than scalability, and it can be addressed by adding a faster CPU, faster hard drives, faster RAM, a faster network connection, etc., if the speed of the CFMX code execution is the performance-limiting factor. As others have said, the greater factors with scalability are infrastructure and whether your site is coded to be scalable. Enjoy, Mike Chabot ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| ColdFusion MX7 by Adobe® Dyncamically transform webcontent into Adobe PDF with new ColdFusion MX7. Free Trial. http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion?sdid=RVJV Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:280598 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
