How easy is it to integrate straight Java/JDBC stuff into MX, and turn the query into a CF query object? Because if that is possible, then this may do the trick... http://www.artima.com/legacy/answers/Sep2001/messages/1.html
jon Ben Forta wrote: > James, > > Yep, that's a rough one. I can tell you that the engineering team did > not just write it off, they agonized over this one. This was not "swept > under the carpet" at all, it was a tough decision, and while you use the > feature most CFers in fact don't, something had to give. I'll forward > your message to the decision makers, but don't expect this to change > when CFMX is initially released. > > --- Ben > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Sleeman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 10:56 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Am I the only one who uses CONNECTSTRING ? (MX rant) > > > Ok, now the NDA is moot I can ask the wider community. One of the best > features IMHO in CF5 was the introduction of CONNECTSTRING to enable us > to have dynamic datasources, that is, DSN-less connections. > > Since CF5 came out I have used these almost exclusively, infact I have > been able to write applications that simply would not have been possible > without it. > > But with the introduction of CF MX the CONNECTSTRING is now no more, at > least in the initial release. This means we say goodbye to dynamic > datasources and it's back to having to have every database set up > individually by the CF administrator. This, in my opinion is a major > step back, surely the purpose of a new release is to add features not > take them away. > > The reason for losing the functionality appears to be to do with JDBC, > and while it is possible to work around, Macromedia has basically said > they don't have time to do it now so it's easier to sweep under the > carpet and perhaps catch it next time - whenever that may be. > > This single issue is certainly going to stop me from using MX with any > of my existing applications - the changes necessary would be widespread, > and in some cases impossible. Indeed, for new applications I will have > to evaluate thier needs carefully to determine if I can use MX or not. > > This is going to cause shared hosting providors to not be able to > upgrade thier existing servers, at least not without imposing on thier > clients to a great degree, it's also going to increase thier work load > because now they must set up each and every database (can you imagine if > 500 clients ask to have thier previously dynamic datasources set up all > at once !). > > But, only a couple of people in the beta group aside form myself seem to > be at all concerned about this. Am I the only one who uses > CONNECTSTRING ? Surely it is such a useful feature that we can't > release MX without it ? Surely it's worth working on for a little > longer to get this functional ? > > Well, just had to get that off my chest, I'll go back to work now :-) > > --- > James Sleeman > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ 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
