Again, if the reason you are locking is to prevent memory corruption (and you do not care about possible overwrites due to concurrent updates, for example) then correct - you'll not need to lock in CFMX.
--- Ben -----Original Message----- From: Gyrus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 5:58 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CF Wishlist > From: "Ben Forta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > You need to lock to prevent race conditions. If that is why you were > locking then yes, you should. > > But you do not need to lock to prevent memory corruption. So, if that > was the only reason you were locking, then no need. I currently store info on users logged into CMS backends (*not* high-traffic sites) in a structure called 'session.user'. I Duplicate this structure to the Request scope in Application.cfm for easy access to the info therein throughout the request without CFLOCK (all the data in it is usually static). So... when I can confidently convert my apps to CFMX, I can just ditch this method and happily refer to session.user.groupID or whatever - as long as it's not being modified on a regular basis - without locking? Whoopee-doo! - Gyrus ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - [EMAIL PROTECTED] work: http://www.tengai.co.uk play: http://www.norlonto.net - PGP key available ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm 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
