Do keep in mind that JRun is a pretty crap J2EE server. Its very limited compared to the competition.
On 7/12/07, Joe Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chris, I can't say the coding would be any different. But there are certainly more capabilities with Enterprise. If you client wants to foot the bill, go for it! Product Edition comparision http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/productinfo/product_editions/#s2 Thanks Joe Kelly On 7/12/07, Christopher Jordan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joe, thanks for responding. > > Joe Kelly wrote: > > Chris, > > My employer had intentions of going through the same scenario with 3 > > different boxes for each stage, except that we are using RedHat and > > Apache with Oracle. Adobe Professional Services (Universal Mind) > > recommended that we eliminate the middle tier and run Apache and CF on > > the same box, which we do now. I would imagine the same would hold > > true for IIS and CF. It made a lot of sense because Apache/IIS really > > don't have a lot of overhead. > > > The IT manager at my client feels like it's a security risk to have > anything but the webserver in the DMZ, and that's his *only* concern. > I'm not even certain it's a valid concern. > > As far as clustering, I would recommend (so does Universal Mind!) that > > you use a hardware load balancer over CF clustering. The overhead is > > about 25% to 50% more for each server to maintain the sticky sessions. > > > > Enterprise will give you the ability to have several instances of CF. > > This way you could run your Development, Testing and Production > > environments all on the same box - in separate instances. So when > > your hokey dev code crashes the server, it will only be the > > development instance that goes down. > > > > Licensing - if you have 2 boxes with CF, you will need 2 licenses, so > > clustering later will require a license for each box running CF. You > > may not have any real justification for Enterprise right now, other > > than it's really cool and powerful with more features and will require > > less change/adjustment when clustering comes later. > Well, it's actually my client who wants to get Enterprise, but they > still want to know what the benefits are. So do you think that 300 to > 500 users is enough to justify clustering? > > > > Another idea to throw in is VMWare. You can "mirror" all your CF > > instances across all your clustered CF servers and they will be > > identical. Plus you have a backup for disaster recovery. > That would be cool. We're using VMWare for email servers at some of our > other client's, and that's pretty slick stuff. > > Also what about coding in Enterprise? Any differences, or changes in > technique necessary to take advantage of clustering or anything else > nifty that Enterprise offers? > > Thanks, > Chris > > > > Good Luck! > > Joe Kelly > > > > > > > > On 7/11/07, Christopher Jordan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Hi folks! :o) > >> > >> I need some advice. > >> > >> I just got out of a meeting with my client and one thing that came > >> up is > >> whether or not to move to CF Enterprise Edition. The IT manager out here > >> wants us to move to a three tiered architecture where we have our web > >> server > >> in the DMZ, and both our application server and database server > >> separate. > >> Currently we run IIS on the same box as CF (which is running as a > >> service), > >> and we access tables in two different types of databases (and old > >> version of > >> DB2 and some very old FoxPro tables... I know: not technically a > >> database). > >> > >> I understand that with the enterprise edition CF comes the ability > >> to do > >> clustering, which we may want to do in the future, but I don't know a > >> whole > >> heck of a lot beyond that, and in fact have never really used the > >> enterprise > >> edition before. > >> > >> My client is under the impression that we cannot do this sort of > >> three-tier > >> separation using the standard edition of CF, and to be honest, I > >> don't know > >> that that's *not* true. > >> > >> So the very general question is what benefits do we get from > >> switching to > >> the enterprise edition? > >> > >> More specifically though: > >> > >> > >> > >> Is my client right? Can we only do this sort of three-tiered > >> architecture > >> using the enterprise edition of CF? > >> We're anticipating that we will have between 300 and 500 users (give or > >> take) when all is said and done. That compares to *maybe* a hundred > >> users > >> right now. Is that sufficient to require clustering? > >> If we do end up getting enterprise and wanting to cluster servers > >> together, > >> is that difficult to set up? And... > >> > >> ... would I have to make any changes to the way that I code to take > >> advantage of clustering? > >> What are the advantages/disadvantages of running CF as a service versus > >> running it as an instance on a J2EE application server? (am I saying > >> that > >> right?) I'm anxious to hear what everyone has to say about all this. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Chris > >> -- > >> http://www.cjordan.us > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Reply to DFWCFUG: > >> [email protected] > >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > >> http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list > >> List Archives: > >> http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/ > >> http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/ > >> DFWCFUG Sponsors: > >> www.instantspot.com/ > >> www.teksystems.com/ > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Reply to DFWCFUG: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list > > List Archives: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/ > > http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/ > > DFWCFUG Sponsors: www.instantspot.com/ > > www.teksystems.com/ > > > > -- > http://www.cjordan.us > > > _______________________________________________ > Reply to DFWCFUG: > [email protected] > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list > List Archives: > http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/ > http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/ > DFWCFUG Sponsors: > www.instantspot.com/ > www.teksystems.com/ > _______________________________________________ Reply to DFWCFUG: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list List Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/ http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/ DFWCFUG Sponsors: www.instantspot.com/ www.teksystems.com/
_______________________________________________ Reply to DFWCFUG: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list List Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/ http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/ DFWCFUG Sponsors: www.instantspot.com/ www.teksystems.com/
