Unfortunately you may be right. I've worked contrary to the views of my
colleagues that an upgrade would be worth it. I just don't have any more
arguments. I wish I could upgrade, but I don't think I can.

I have also seen lots of issues with MX and COM (e.g.
http://cfguru.daemon.com.au/archives/000058.html) and we use some COM.

I might still install MX on my own system and use it there. If I find a use
in the future, particularly with CFCs, then I might try it out. Otherwise I
am probably stuck with CF5.

Paolo

-----Original Message-----
From: Kola Oyedeji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 13 February 2003 11:10
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] CFMX is second class


As that application has a specific architecture which performs better on
CF5 
Perhaps you should keep that application on CF5 and load test a
different application on CFMX?

If the application does not make use of any CFMX specific features and
does not perform any better then perhaps an upgrade is unnecessary  


Kola

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Paolo Piponi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: 13 February 2003 11:10
>> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
>> Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] CFMX is second class
>> 
>> I agree. Unfortunately, it was built for a business model we no
longer
>> follow.
>> 
>> I just checked out the worst page and it has 48 includes. Most of
these,
>> bear in mind, are perhaps one line of code. However, the model
allowed us
>> to
>> syndicate content and outsource management of our content to third
>> parties.
>> Our original model was anticipating many many third parties. It now
>> transpires that the only third party is 'moi'.
>> 
>> Yes, yes, you might say the problem is the application, not MX, but
that
>> does not help me make a decision - this is the real world.
>> 
>> Also bear in mind, even with these 40-odd includes, a single page is
>> processed somewhere between 200-300 milliseconds, which is slow but
good
>> enough for our load. CFMX made this a lot worse.
>> 
>> Paolo
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stephen Moretti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: 13 February 2003 10:41
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: [ cf-dev ] CFMX is second class
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> > > What sort of processes did you find to be slower?
>> >
>> > Each hit to our site calls in about 40-odd pages. I couldn't
identify
>> > anything obvious except a general slowing down. The processing-time
>> > reporting does differ between 5 and MX so a detailed comparison was
>> > difficult.
>> >
>> My mouth is hanging wide!!!  I've been involved in some pretty big
>> applications in my time and I've never had a situation where there
have
>> been
>> 40+ includes in each request to the application!!!!  Even Synergy
didn't
>> have that many includes in one page!
>> 
>> One thing to bear in mind with this is that everytime you make a
request
>> to
>> the index.cfm and include different pages you will be compiling each
of
>> those templates!  First run through a template will take anywhere
between
>> 1
>> and 10 seconds for it to compile.  If you have 40 templates to
compile
>> that's a hell of a lot of work to do and a hell of a lot of code
that's
>> going to be stashed in memory too!
>> 
>> >
>> > > Which OS ?
>> >
>> > W2000 Server
>> >
>> How come you had so much hassle installing CFMX on win2k??  It just
>> installs!  I've got cf5 and cfmx running side by side here, no
problem
>> and
>> CFMX installs easily on linux too!  You just have to follow the
>> instructions
>> and attach the hooks into the web server after it installed!  I would
be
>> tempted to use a technical term and say that your OS is shagged!
>> 
>> > 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.
>> >
>> I use a sort of XFB or as its called on other lists
>> Tazboxfuseabix2.5893.34a.  I digress, the point being that
applications
>> include multiple files for queries, actions and displays, as well as
>> global
>> settings and layouts.  I confess that I was concerned moving a couple
of
>> apps to CFMX that there was going to be a degredation in the speed
due to
>> the way in which CFMX now processes templates and includes, but have
been
>> pleasantly surprised to find that after a template has been included
and
>> compiled the application runs like the proverbial dogdoo off a stick!
>> Of course you've got to be sure that the cache can hold sufficient
>> templates. (See the CF admin settings)
>> 
>> 
>> > 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.
>> >
>> Try reinstalling your box from scratch, because from all the troubles
>> you've
>> had there sounds to be something seriously unhappy on your box.  Once
>> you've
>> done that install CF5 and CFMX side by side.  Don't connect CFMX
straight
>> into IIS (or any other webserver for that matter) during the install,
let
>> it
>> run off of its own server (runs on port 8500).  BTW : this is the way
you
>> should install CFMX whether its to run alongside CF5 or not.  Connect
to
>> your web server after you've installed it.
>> 
>> 
>> Heck!!  Look at me!!!  I like CFMX!!!  When did that happen!!!???!!
I
>> may
>> even actually be looking at cfcs in the next week as well!!  How
scary is
>> that!!??
>> 
>> Anyway, Paolo, I really would recommend sorting your box out and
trying
>> again.
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Stephen
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> ** 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]
>> 
>> --
>> ** 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]


-- 
** 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]

-- 
** 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]

Reply via email to