I'd vote for a cached query.
You wouldn't need to recode very much at all - just a simple search and
replace across files should do it, and the biggie:
you wouldn't need to lock every access.
Dave Hannum wrote:
>
> Hey, this is NT. It gets restarted almost daily - so that's when the
> Application variables would get reset - LOL. Really, not more than once a
> quarter would this need to be updated. Seriously, I have used the
> CACHEDWITHIN method, but I was just wondering if anybody thought setting the
> Application variables would be better.
>
> Dave
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Woods" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:26 AM
> Subject: Re: Caching Query vs. Setting Application Var
>
> > both methods put the data in memory so from an efficiency point of view,
> > both should be pretty much the same.
> >
> > Query caching is a much simpler method of achieving the required result.
> If
> > you store the query structure as an application variable, when does it get
> > updated?? At least with Query caching you can specify a time span or an
> > absolute time for the expiration of the cache. If you were to use an
> > application variable you'd have to come up with some way of determining
> > when the database should be re-queried and the new result set assigned to
> > the application variable (maybe at the start of a new user session). Of
> > course, this would give you more explicit control over the cache, but is
> it
> > worth the hassle?
> >
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> > At 01:04 PM 4/3/2001, you wrote:
> > >Hello,
> > >
> > >I have an application that generates Faculty Class Lists here at the
> > >university. When the faculty or administrator first comes in, it queries
> > >our Data Warehouse for a list of active instructors. The list is about
> 1400
> > >names. The SQL for this query never changes. Related, our Data
> Warehouse
> > >is in Oracle on the IBM mainframe. SO, as a result, queries on larger
> > >tables (well, about any query for that matter) is very slow. My question
> > >is, would it be more effecient to do a QUERY CACHEDAFTER or put the
> results
> > >into an application variable?
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >Dave
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >===============================
> > >David R Hannum
> > >Ohio University
> > >Web Analyst/Programmer
> > >(740) 597-2524
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
