Paolo, > > Yes, includes. This might be the issue. Java might take longer to open > and close each instance compared to CF5 interpreting text files on the > fly. > > Of course my test was not wholly scientific. I took a selection of > pages within the website and repeatedly called these pages: there was > a dramatic difference. I then uninstalled and installed 5 and was > shocked that 5 was then faster. >
I hate to ask, but what software did you use for load testing? If you didn't, redo the tests using OpenSTA (http://www.opensta.org) and then come back with some meaningful results... Saying it's slower isn't much help. While being true, it may not be true under load, and it may not be true in actual fact. Also, if it's an upgraded site, there is a possibility that some of the older tags haven't been fully optimised, so saying that CFMX is slower than CF5 may be a comment on the code's suitability for CFMX, and not on CFMX itself. Anyway, I like CFMX so much, I'd recommend you upgrade anyway! Paul -- ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
