|
I agree with Eric. That was a pretty condescending
tone Matt. Shame on you.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 4:31
PM
Subject: RE: [CFCDev] MVCF at
benorama.com
Do you fail to
see the following points:
A- The data is
new to many of us: you are not the only ColdFusion developer in the
world.
B- You are an
extremely coarse individual, and your brash tone has caused me to consider
dropping this list like a bag of rocks. I know you are allegedly a "Brilliant
Mind" involved with CF, however, that doesn't mean you immediately garner my
respect. You, like all others, must earn it. Treating EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US
on this list as though we were bratty children is doing nothing toward either
our willingness to continue on this list nor your standing in the eyes of lots
of damned good developers.
That's all I
have to say.
--
Eric C. Davis
Programmer/Analyst
I
Georgia Department of Transportation
Office of I.T.
Applications
404.463.2860.158
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
First of all, I
didn't state that CFCs don't scale. I stated that the use of CFCs as models
as part of the MVC pattern doesn't scale. This is an important distinction.
Second, I didn't make the statement out of the blue. This issue has been
extensively discussed on this very list with evidence provided by many
people including myself. I'm sorry if you missed those discussions, but I am
not especially eager to restart them when it seems there is no new data to
consume.
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff
Battershall
Sent: Monday,
March 24, 2003 4:12 PM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [CFCDev] MVCF at
benorama.com
Not to be
combative, but it's not all that helpful to say that "CFCs don't scale"
without providing evidence, and the context of the problems
observed, i.e., what platform, what code, what conditions. This
is an important issue from my perspective. I'm using CFCs
extensively, and besides our friend the Page Context Bug, things have been
going great. I like the fact that I am able to effect a cleaner
separation of biz logic/presentation, and move toward a more elegant pattern
of development. And that's not mentioning the ability to drive
different clients with web services.
So before
we label CFCs as "not ready for prime time" or some such, more data is
needed.
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 3:39
PM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [CFCDev] MVCF at
benorama.com
Well 30k page
views per day breaks down to less than 1 per second, which even a badly
written application should be able to handle on the hardware you
mentioned.
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert
Bailey
Sent: Monday,
March 24, 2003 3:28 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [CFCDev] MVCF at
benorama.com
Yeah, maybe I
have been blessed, lol. As I said, I have had different reactions with MX
server on a regular basis, especially when sand box security is
installed.
15k RPM SCSI
drives (no RAID)
Load, if you are
asking by page views, about 30k page views per day. This what you were
asking?
Thanks!
Robert
Bailey
Famous for
nothing
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Matt
Liotta
Sent: Monday,
March 24, 2003 3:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [CFCDev] MVCF at
benorama.com
It is wonderful
that you didn't have any problems. However, that doesn't really speak to
whether or not there is scalability issues with the use of CFCs for
models in MVC. What kind of hardware are you using to obtain what kind
of load?
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert
Bailey
Sent: Monday,
March 24, 2003 3:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [CFCDev] MVCF at
benorama.com
I have not had
any problems on my latest application, using Windows 2000, CFMX with
updater 3, and IIS 5
But then, I
have developed applications on one MX server and when moved to a
production MX server it behaved differently, even when the configuration
was the same. Go figure. The only problem I came across this last
project is how MX does not like to play with some objects nicely, so I
had to give some of the work to ASP, but played together rather nicely.
Thanks!
Robert
Bailey
Famous for
nothing
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Matt
Liotta
Sent: Monday,
March 24, 2003 3:01 PM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [CFCDev] MVCF at
benorama.com
The testing I
have conducted shows that the using CFCs as models in an MVC pattern
will not scale without serious hacks. It is possible that a framework
will emerge that provides these hacks, but I haven't seen any as of
yet. Please look to the archives of this list for discussion of these
scalability issues.
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Davis,
Eric
Sent: Monday,
March 24, 2003 1:55 PM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [CFCDev] MVCF at
benorama.com
Link: <http://www.benorama.com/coldfusion/>
Word ver.: <http://www.benorama.com/coldfusion/patterns/MVCF.doc>
Has anyone looked really hard at this one?
What are everybody's thoughts on this?
I'm looking for a replacement to Fusebox 3 for
MX - FBMX is too slow coming, and probably won't make much sense
anyway (I'm guessing it'll be quite obfuscatory and rather difficult
to implement the first five to ten times).
He's put together quite a presentation, and he
about has me convinced, if only I can simplify the structure a bit.
I'm trying to find the right methodology for my team here to use, and
they're NONE of them big methodology-users.
Anyway, just haven't seen any threads about
this, and wondered if you folks had anything to say on the
subject.
Which of course you must; you always do.
;)
Thanks,
ecd.
--
Eric C. Davis
Programmer/Analyst
I
Georgia
Department of Transportation
Office of I.T. Applications
404.463.2860.158
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
