Hi Joe, I would like to discuss this with my sys admin folks - do you have any pointers to articles etc or personal experience testing the hardware vs CF load balancing options?
Thanks, Tom -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joe Kelly Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 8:22 AM To: Dallas/Fort Worth ColdFusion User Group Mailing List Subject: Re: [DFW CFUG] CF8 Enterprise I have to throw this in again... You will get much better performance with a hardware load balancer than clustering using CF. Thanks, Joe Kelly On 7/13/07, Christopher Jordan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Adrian, thanks so much for your input. > > See further comments and questions below. > > Adrian J. Moreno wrote: > > Christopher Jordan wrote: > >> So the very general question is what benefits do we get from > >> switching to the enterprise edition? > >> > >> More specifically though: > >> > >> 1. Is my client right? Can we only do this sort of three-tiered > >> architecture using the enterprise edition of CF? > > > > Yes you can, we're working on implementing this in the next couple of > > months. > Yes, but is it *only* possible to set up this kind of three-tiered > situation using the enterprise edition, or can it also be done using > Standard or Professional? > > > >> 2. 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? > > > > Doubtful. You may only need a pair of load balanced CF Standard > > servers for that few users. > Thanks, that's sort of what I thought > > > >> 3. If we do end up getting enterprise and wanting to cluster servers > >> together, is that difficult to set up? And... > > > > It's not really difficult, just annoying. > How is it annoying? > > > >> 4. ... would I have to make any changes to the way that I code to > >> take advantage of clustering? > > > > We've got 8 clustered CF servers and I don't think we code any > > differently than I have in the past. You only have to write things > > differently if you're doing OO with multiple instances and are placing > > objects into application or session variables. > Okay. I think that's what I was looking for. We don't really do OO (not > yet anyway), but we do make use of CFCs to hold queries, and other code > reuse. > > > >> 5. 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?) > > > > When you create an instance of CF on Windows, there's an option to > > create a Windows service for it as well. > > > > When you run multiple servers and multiple instances on each server, > > when an error occurs you need to know exactly which server & instance > > the user was on when it happened. Go to > > http://www.unitrinspecialty.com and Ctrl+A to select all the text on > > the page. We place that info in white text under the footer and pass > > it in hidden field values on the form that users get when an error > > happens. > I see the server and date information. That's cool. > > > > Unless you're going to need Event Gateways (aren't they going to be in > > CF 8 Standard?) or multiple instances I don't see any reason to go to > > Enterprise. But if you do and you don't want to use JRun, CF 8 > > officially supports JBoss. There's no need use Weblogic or some of > > those other high dollar J2EE application servers when JBoss is free. > We're running CF as a service on Windows Server 2003 R2, and there is an > instance of JRun in our task manager. In an earlier post Eric Knipp > suggested that JRun wasn't the greatest J2EE server. Do you (or anyone > else) think that we'd get better performance (even while running as a > service) if we were to use JBoss? Or is JBoss something you only use > when *not* running as a windows service. > > Sorry for all the bonehead questions. I really appreciate everyone's > help and advice! :o) > > 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/ _______________________________________________ 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/
