You'd still need to lock with the method you suggested.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Bastian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 4:37 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: RE: Storing Queries in Application Scope
>
>
> Yes... the point is to avoid locking every where else..
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kwang Suh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 6:16 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: RE: Storing Queries in Application Scope
>
>
> This wouldn't work.
>
> If you're just doing a declarative, then you're only making a reference to
> the application query. Which means that you're still accessing the
> application query even if you're using the request scope.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joe Bastian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 3:09 PM
> > To: CF-Talk
> > Subject: RE: RE: Storing Queries in Application Scope
> >
> >
> > Hi Issac,
> > Your are right as well.."Right tool for the right Job". I
> > wonder if it
> > would be a
> > better solution to "NOT Duplicate the Structure" like
> > <cflock type="readonly" timeout="20">
> > <cfset Request.MyReqQuery=Application.MyQuery> Note: No
> > Duplicate or
> > StructCopy
> > </cflock>
> > There by only making referrence to Application scope like a
> > POINTER since
> > the data doesnt need to manipulated and only stored/displayed.
> > Wouldnt this save memory space.. since u are not really
> > creating a DEEP
> > Copy
> > into the 2nd structure(Request)?
> > Joe
> > Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: S. Isaac Dealey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 4:30 PM
> > To: CF-Talk
> > Subject: RE: RE: Storing Queries in Application Scope
> >
> >
> > Hi Joe,
> >
> > Yes, your assertion is absolutely correct: using duplicate to copy data
> > between the application and request scopes does mean having 2 (
> or more )
> > coppies of the same data taking up space in different places in memory (
> > though my understanding is that the request scope variable
> memory is freed
> > up when the page finished processing ).
> >
> > It typically can be done in the request scope if you only need it
> > on a given
> > page, if you don't have any problems going to the database on every page
> > that needs the data, or if you can use cached queries.
> >
> > The advantage to storing this information in the application
> scope is that
> > it's persistent across multiple users, so you may only have to go to the
> > database once for several dozen or hundred or so page views (even in a
> > cflock, retreiving a query from the application scope is almost
> invariably
> > faster than retreiving the data from a database), and it provides more
> > control over the data and when it's refreshed or otherwise modified than
> > cached queries.
> >
> > All that being said, it's not always the solution of choice. :)
> Right tool
> > for the right job, ya know. :)
> >
> > Isaac
> >
> > www.turnkey.to
> > 954-776-0046
> >
> > Original Message -----------------------
> > Using the duplicate() arent you actually creating a DEEP
> > "DUPLICATE" of the
> > structure.
> > So you have the query in "APPLICATION" scope and then in
> > "REQUEST" scope...
> > taking
> > up MEMORY?
> > Why cant this just be done in the Request Scope and avoid LOCKING and
> > Structure duplicates?
> >
> > <cfquery="Request.MyNewQuery" datasource="MyDB">
> > Select Field1, Field2 .. from MyTable
> > </cfquery>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
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
