Has anyone actually done any performance testing on this? I have, on a p-166
with 32 megs ram, and lemme tell ya, traversing 20 higher directories
looking for app.cfm provided no noticeable difference in performance, even
when cflooping a cfmodule, looking for app.cfm 100 times. Unnoticeable means
0-20ms extra, which cannot be honestly clocked.
Nonetheless, Fusebox should always use an application.cfm file, with the
previously beat-to-death code snippet for individual template security.
Search the archives for it, please don't ask here because then EVERYONE has
to give THIER version of it and why it's better and will execute faster.
NAT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eron Cohen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 7:41 AM
> To: Fusebox
> Subject: RE: onRequestEnd.cfm
>
>
> [I'll point out the slight technicality that
> OnRequestEnd.CFM _must_ be in the same directory as
> the currently "operative" Application.cfm or it will
> be ignored. (This also means that you must actually
> HAVE an Application.cfm file--which is also part of
> the same Michael Dinowitz trick...if it is not present
> CF will search for it.)]
>
> Eron
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Beard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 12:25 PM
> To: Fusebox
> Subject: onRequestEnd.cfm
>
>
> Was told something recently that I hear was a "michael
> dinowitz trick" that
> everyone may not be aware of. You should make a
> OnRequestEnd.cfm in the
> root of your cf applications, even if it is blank
> (needs to contain atleast
> a comment). Otherwise cf takes a performance hit when
> it recurses all the
> way to the root looking for one.
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
