We admin a heavily used CF hosting service and you really do need to spend
some time tuning the server etc. Claiming FB is responsible for memory
leakage is ... well, misleading.
Here's my initial Do's and Don't's
1. If you are on NT Server then reboot the box weekly.
2. Restart the CF service once a day using the supplied cycle.bat - making
sure that you include both cfserver.exe AND cfexe.exe
3. Move client variable storage from the Registry to an ODBC datasource
4. Enforce automatic read locking for application and session variable
scope.
5. Set your swap to x2 your physical RAM
6. Make sure simultaneous requests is > than your restart after uresponsive
requests - say 5 nd 3 respectively.
7. Deprecate the use of CFINSERT and CFUPDATE use CFQUERY with SQL instead.
8. Set the SMTP host using IP not DNS name.
9. Don't allow use of CFMAIL with an empty body for the message
10. Set the template cache to approx 1.5 x the total CFML pages that you
have on the server - memory permitting.
11. Check those logs and tune your server.
John Smith
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shawn Regan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 04 April 2001 20:11
> To: Fusebox
> Subject: RE: Memory Leak
>
>
> I would host with someone else thats not relying on a P2 with 128 mem for
> production. That looks like an 8088 compared to our Dev machine.
>
> Shawn Regan
> Applications Developer
> Pacific Technology Solutions
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cameron Childress [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 11:08 AM
> To: Fusebox
> Subject: RE: Memory Leak
>
>
> > these 2 sites get very little in traffic. The system hoasting
> > these sites is
> > a P2 128 meg, running NT 4.0 (sp 8 I think) and CF 4.5.2 with
> all service
> > packs.
>
> They hosting or hosing it? Roasting? :)
>
> AFAIK, NT SPs only go up to 6. Also, there's no such thing as CF
> 4.5.2, but
> there is 4.5.1 SP2.
>
> Ok, now that's all done... What makes then think it's you? Also, 128 RAM
> is what I have on my desktop, I would bet just about any site
> could overload
> that box. 128 megs of RAM on a server, though possible, is way less than
> typical.
>
> -Cameron
>
> --------------------
> Cameron Childress
> elliptIQ Inc.
> p.770.460.7277.232
> f.770.460.0963
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lee Alder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 1:17 PM
> > To: Fusebox
> > Subject: Memory Leak
> >
> >
> > Quick question.
> >
> > I started using fusebox about 6 months ago. Two sites that were done in
> > fusebox are now being blaimed for memory overload (or leaks). Even thou
> > these 2 sites get very little in traffic. The system hoasting
> > these sites is
> > a P2 128 meg, running NT 4.0 (sp 8 I think) and CF 4.5.2 with
> all service
> > packs.
> >
> > IMHO the 'person' saying fusebox is the cause has there head up
> the fouth
> > point of contact.
> >
> >
> > Opinions?
> >
> > Lee
> >
> >
> >
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
