You can also update the database and set the flag if the user closes the browser window without logging out properly
Also if u r using client variables instead of session variables , then the session will not expire in this case, so these problems wont arise > -----Original Message----- > From: nagraj [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 3:47 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Keeping track of logged-in users... > > Hello, > > But If User Leave the system or Session Expires.The database is not > updated > from flag=1 to flag=0.This may lead to problems.I think you can preserver > LastLogin time.i.e. When ever user log in we keep the User login > information > in db.If we > are known with session time out peroid we can use that information to find > out logged users. > > If you can you can store the Information in Application variable a > structure.But It has its own drawbacks. > > But Still you can give a try to one of the above. > > With Regards > Nagaraj.A > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dimple Goshar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 3:05 PM > Subject: RE: Keeping track of logged-in users... > > > > Hi, > > > > If you want to avoid updates to your database, you can have another > > column in your users database , "loggedon" which is set to > > 1 when the user logs on to the site and set to 0 when the user logs > > off > > > > Then u can give ur report on the basis of this column > > > > > > Regards > > Dimple > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Kevin Langevin [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 2:42 PM > > > To: CF-Talk > > > Subject: Keeping track of logged-in users... > > > > > > Hi all- Got a "best practices" question for you. > > > > > > I've got a client site which uses client variables to track users' > > > sessions > > > for auto-logout. When a user logs on, a CLIENT.lastAccess variable is > set > > > to now(). In the application.cfm, a check is run to see if > > > CLIENT.lastAccess is defined and if it's more recent than 20 minutes. > If > > > it > > > is, then CLIENT.lastAccess is set to now() again, and processing > > > continues. > > > As long as the client hits a page before the 20 minute time limit runs > > > out, > > > works great. To log the user out, I delete certain client variables, > > > especially lastAccess. > > > > > > Now my dimlemma. The client decided that he wants to track how many > users > > > are "logged on" (how many have accessed a page in the last 20 minutes > and > > > haven't yet been logged off. > > > > > > The only way I can see to do this is to ALSO write now() into a > lastAccess > > > field in the member database on each hit right after writing the > client > > > variable, so that the home page, which is supposed to display the > number > > > of > > > users logged in, can run a query on members with a lastAccess field > with > a > > > time less than 20 minutes ago. This just seems like a lot of DB > access > > > (one > > > write when setting the CLIENT variable, and another when updating the > > > member > > > table), but I'm wondering if anyone has experience doing something > like > > > this, and whether that one extra update on each page hit will hurt > that > > > much. Assume a few thousand members hitting the site daily, spread > out, > > > most likely, but probably surfing around a fair bit (lots of articles, > and > > > a > > > message board). Doing the CLIENT variable update seems to impact the > site > > > not at all, but I've not tested under really heavy load. > > > > > > Does anyone have a more elegant way of doing this, like parsing the > Client > > > DB for the CLIENT.lastAccess variable and getting a count of the ones > with > > > a > > > value less than 20 minutes ago. Any suggestions would be most > > > appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks... > > > > > > Kevin Langevin > > > Flying Chimp Media > > > 954-585-0999 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://www.FlyingChimp.com > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Neil Clark - =TMM= [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 4:51 AM > > > > To: CF-Talk > > > > Subject: RE: CF's Most Wanted :: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Peoples > > > > > > > > Well, I can say, since its public knowledge in some circles that > locking > > > > will no longer be required with Neo - the server will handle this > side > > > > of things. CFMX has addressed the fact that failure to lock shared > > > > scope vairables will not cause memory corruption while a write > operation > > > > is in progress. > > > > > > > > **However**, you will still have to lock for the legitimate use - to > > > > prevent synchronous activity ensuring that requests are requests are > > > > processed one at a time. For example, if I am about to reread a > cached > > > > query I might decide that all requests that need this query should > wait > > > > so as to ensure that they have the newer data. > > > > > > > > Hope this helps! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neil > > > > Team Macromedia > > > > http://www.macromedia.com/go/team > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
