That functionality is available in CF MX Enterprise ($5000) but is not
included in CFMX Professional ($799.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rey Muradaz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: Fusebox 3 on CFMX
This isn't directly an FB3 thing--it relates to the fundamental difference
between MX and previous versions of CF. Unlike 'old' CF, which was written
in C++ and 'compiled' your pages to p-code, MX is written in Java and
compiles your application pages to Java bytecode, which is what's used in
subsequent requests (in fact, as I understand it, Ben Forta did a demo at
last year's DevCon where he ran the app once, *deleted the CF pages*, and
was able to run it again, with the server relying on the bytecode version of
the app--apparently that functionality isn't in the release version of MX,
but supposedly they're working on it).
Long aside aside, the long processing time on the first pass is because of
the compilation process, but after the first pass, subsequent hits should be
much faster than previous versions ('hella' fast is the technical term, I
believe :). Of course, this might be a pain in the ass for developers--I
haven't had too much first-hand experience trying to 'tweak' an FB call with
20-30 includes--but the production app will be speedy.
My guess is that someone will write (or MM will develop) a 'crawler' that
will hit all of the pages of an app on restart, so that end users won't
notice this lag. In the meantime, just walk your app whenever you kick the
machine . . .
REM O-
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/07/02 04:57AM >>>
Hi,
I have just upgraded my dev machine to CFMX and I have noticed that my
fusebox apps are running really slowly on it. Below is an example of the
execution times for one particular section. Once the section has been
called once then it all seems to run really quickly but why is it so slow
first time around and how can I speed things up?
Total Time Avg Time Count Template
5337 ms 5337 ms 1 C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\index.cfm
5327 ms 5327 ms 1
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\fbx_fusebox301_CF50_nix.cfm
3154 ms 3154 ms 1 C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\about\fbx_Switch.cfm
2143 ms 2143 ms 1 C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\typicallayout.cfm
40 ms 40 ms 1
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\about\qry_about_top_headlines.cfm
10 ms 10 ms 1 C:\CFusionMX\CustomTags\secure.cfm
10 ms 10 ms 1 C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\dsp_header.cfm
10 ms 10 ms 1 C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\fbx_Settings.cfm
0 ms 0 ms 1 C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\Application.cfm
0 ms 0 ms
1 C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\about\dsp_unauth_about.cfm
0 ms 0 ms
1 C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\about\fbx_Settings.cfm
0 ms 0 ms 1 C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\dsp_footer.cfm
0 ms 0 ms 1 C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\fbx_Circuits.cfm
0 ms 0 ms 1 C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\projects\homesite\fbx_Layouts.cfm
0 ms STARTUP, PARSING, COMPILING, LOADING, & SHUTDOWN
5337 ms TOTAL EXECUTION TIME
Also, are there any plans to make the core file into a CFC or have I
misunderstood what CFC's are for?
If I understand it correctly making the core file into a CFC will enable
you to have just one copy of it on the server and call it in every fusebox
app. instead of having it located in every root application.
If I am way off the mark with this idea then please let me know as I may
have missed something about CFC's.
Cheers
Dave Phipps
============================================
Phipps CF Development
Oxford, Oxfordshire.
Telephone: +44(0)7718 896696
http://www.phipps-cf.co.uk
============================================
==^================================================================
This email was sent to: [email protected]
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrFMa.bV0Kx9
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================
