Spectrum
|
| Posted: 02/20/2003, 5:40 AM |
|
Hi all,
firstly congratulations for excelent job in CodeCharge Studio.
Please answer my first question:
Why parse and load template is so slooooooooowwww???
When updating my MSAccess DB, very very simple scripts, this is coldfusion execution time:
0 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\APPLICATION.CFM
0 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CATEGORIES\CATEGORIES.CFM
261 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CATEGORIES\CATEGORIES_TBLCATEGORIES.CFM -->>VERY VERY SLOW
20 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CATEGORIES\CATEGORIES_TBLCATEGORIES1.CFM
50 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CATEGORIES\CATEGORIES_TBLCATEGORIESSEARCH.CFM
10 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCADDPARAM.CFM
10 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCGETPARAM.CFM
0 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCGETQUERYSTRING.CFM
170 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCISEXISTS.CFM
361 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCLOADTEMPLATE.CFM ---->>VERY VERY SLOW
10 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCNAVIGATOR.CFM
50 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCOPENRS.CFM
411 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCPARSE.CFM ---->> VERY VERY SLOW
10 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCSECURITY.CFM
190 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCSETVAR.CFM
50 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCSORTER.CFM
10 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCTOSQL.CFM
50 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\CCWHEREPARAMS.CFM
0 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\COMMON.CFM
50 ms C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\REALESTATE\COMMONCONST.CFM
Second question:
How can change this slow execution to faster code? Is possible?
Thanx in advance
Spectrum WD
|
|
|
 |
Sjg
|
| Posted: 02/21/2003, 3:55 PM |
|
We created a few prototype pages with CCS 1.7.
Cold Fusion (v4.5) ran much slower than ASP. The culprit seemed to be all the additional cfm files that were included.
We also found alot of bugs with the CCS 1.7 ColdFusion models. The bugs were based on multiple databases and accessing more than one database on a page. Not Tables but Databases.
Some tuning could have probaly helped the coldfusion run faster. Tuning could have probaly helped the ASP run faster too.
The final outcome we choose was not to use CCS and Coldfusion.
Another item you will want to look at long term costs of maintenance. Will Cold Fusion be around in 5 years?
While a code generators are a great tool, coding will still need to be done by hand. In the case of a code generator (like CCS), the code will be placed in the exit points (Events). The more complex the application, the more code will need to go into the events.
This will mean that the developer will still need to have knowledge of the language. As ASP/.NET/C# become more the industry norm, fewer developers with Coldfusion skills will be available. This will run ColdFusion developer rates up and development costs up.
My suggestion, if you are not already ingrained in ColdFusion, get away from it.
People (CF advocates) will probably scream, but think about the overall costs. Many companies run Windows servers, these servers can run ASP without the additional costs like you have for ColdFusionMX. The last I looked, I thought it was about $750 per server to run MX. This will mean companies will not choose to run Coldfusion due to the cost.
In fact if you don't run your own servers and are outsourcing to a host provider, you will see (in general) that it is cheaper to have ASP hosting, than MX hosting or .Net hosting. And MX hosting is normally more expensive than .Net hosting. I guarantee that the host provider is costing the services out and this indicates that MX is more expensive than .Net or ASP.
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
ridleyrob
|
| Posted: 02/21/2003, 6:32 PM |
|
I was curious to know what kind of real estate application are you building? If you like you can send me an e-mail atconsult@missioncritical.net.
|
|
|
|
RonB
|
| Posted: 02/22/2003, 2:57 AM |
|
asp and .net the new standard? Most articles published on .net are very critical. .net has yet to show what all the hype is about. ASP? Sure if you want to pay for every little added component, that's your choice. Being locked in by what MS wants you to do instead of deciding for yourself..if that's what you like.
PHP is my choice. Not only because it's free but also because provider support is widespread and mostly cheap, crossplatform development, easy connection to mysql oracle,sqlserver etc and faster then any ASP I've ever seen.
Just look around on the web and ask yourself if asp is the standard there, not to mention the almost absent .net I've heard arguments about asp and .net being the only choice for serious webbapps and I must say they havent been able to convince me.
With asp and .net you are chained to MS, well known for it's "do as you're told" way of handling custumors. My code can be ported from windows to linux, unix, freebsd etc etc mostly without changing a single line of code. Now go and try that with your .net application. Apache is becomming the web standard faster and faster and linux is gaining ground on the server side fast. If MS doesn't come up with a way of using apache/linux in their .net strategy they might well loose this one.
My boss is very happy with my choice for the apache/php combination, running smoothly on win2k servers, he's even more then happy with the lack of liscence bills.
Ron
|
|
|
|
NoName
|
| Posted: 02/22/2003, 8:46 AM |
|
I am working for a very large branch of US gov. Most of our servers have been standardized on Win2k platform with its IIS server which includes ASP for free. The other cross office application standard for us is MS_Office2k with AccessDB. Some of our units run MS-SQL servers. We also run several Oracle servers.
ColdFusion is being phased out!
We are also looking into Linux for our servers.
|
|
|
|
Marcus
|
| Posted: 02/23/2003, 9:01 AM |
|
Ron B.,
since you already run on Win2k server - You will gain performance running php/MySQL without the Apache.
|
|
|
|
|
