> Again this just goes to show that the issue of locking has
> *never* been clearly defined. I doubt you'll get a satisfactory
> answer - over the last couple of years we never have.
I strongly agree with this, and I think it's the biggest problem with
ColdFusion - the lack of definitive, authoritative answers to questions
about how the engine behaves internally.
> The only thing i can suggest is testing and our testing indicates
> the following:
>
> a) there is no need to READ lock if the the scope can be
> guaranteed never to change. We have done this using the
> APPLICATION scope as a constant.
While I haven't tested this personally, it sounds reasonable enough; my
difficulty with this is that there's the possibility for developers to screw
this up, and it doesn't seem like read locking is that great a penalty to
avoid developer screwups.
> b) appropriate named locks around structures within a shared
> scope (eg. server.stMystruct) are sufficient to prevent memory
> corruption under any load.
Now here, my experience has differed with yours. In the last week, we had a
site with problems under load that appeared to be within CFA_CONTAINER. The
error message was especially helpful:
"Unknown exception occurred within a tag"
This appeared to go away after replacing the two named read locks (locks
which touched different parts of the Server scope, and which had two
different names) with SCOPE="SERVER".
Not to say you're wrong about this, just that I don't have much of a clue
about what's going on inside the server.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
voice: (202) 797-5496
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/spectra_talk or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
