Hi Kym:
I have a feeling this is getting somewhat convoluted :-)
>
> But iMS is CF, do you mean to have the templates on one machine and CF on
> another?
What do you mean when you say "iMS is CF"? To me, (at least), iMS is s st of
MTA services and Cf is an interpreter. We can however say that iMS_uses_CF (or
even can use CF).
>
> >I believe that SQL and iMS are both extremely stable and efficient, whereas
> >IIS/CF might be resource hogs and less stable. If the web server goes down,
at
> >least the mail is still delivered.
>
> Not if CF is driving it :-)
Yes - but CF does_not_have to reside on a webserver or even drive a website. CF
is usually used for driving websites, but that is not its entire function, which
surely is to interpret CF templates. iMS uses CF templates, but does not_need_a
we server anywhere AFAIK.
Ergo - the scenario of two servers:
1) IIS/CF
2) iMS/CF/SQL
makes alot of sense - of course all DSN's on both servers point to the SQL
database.
The objective of keeping web services physically seperate from SQL/mail is
achieved - and I am now totally convinced that is a good thing.
Regards,
Adrian.
========================================================================
This list server is Powered by iMS
'The Swiss Army Knife of Mail Servers'
--------------------------------------
To leave this list please complete the form at
http://www.CoolFusion.com/iMS.htm
List archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/infusion-email%40eoscape.com/
========================================================================
