No I haven't...but if that were the case in your instance I would have suggested storing complex objects in session scope in cfmx rather then client wddx packets...but in your case it's obvious that's not applicable.
I don't use all to much wddx, sorry can't contribute on that front... Stace -----Original Message----- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 1:15 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Stace, No..Not Client Scope. That would be a real big problem..(client scope WDDX)... if all this turns out to be true....(WDDX Serialize - Deserialize) performance in CFMX unless there is an optmized way(cfmx) to code WDDX. Yea.. WDDX in client scope is great... The App am dealing with...WDDX is written to the database for Content MGMT, i didnt code this.. am not sure.. why the developer used this method..The data is even redundant. Have you had a chance to LOAD TEST any Client Scope WDDX in CFMX..? Curious? Joe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stacy Young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 12:10 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > Hey Joe I'm curious...these objects...are they wddx packets stored in client > scope which in turn is in your client variable datasource? > > Stace > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:54 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > > Sean, > I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing > it > down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store > that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. > Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX > parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we > are seeing a pattern here with tests. > I will try to write case/result...end of this week or so. > Is it possible that you can find out.. > How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? > Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. > Thanks > Joe > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sean A Corfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:00 AM > Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? > > > > On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 07:26 , Joe Eugene wrote: > > > Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences > > > between > > > CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX > > > > Er, yes, it was written in C/C++ in CF5 and it's been rewritten in Java in > > CFMX. As has everything else. Read my lips Joe: CFMX is a complete > rewrite. > > > > > What does #1 mean? > > > > I don't know. I don't use JavaScript with queries so I don't know what the > > behavior was or how it changed. > > > > > If WDDX data is Stored in a DB and output using custom tags.. is > > > there any internal CFMX > > > implementation that would degrade performance compared to CF5.0? > > > > Well, custom tag invocations are faster in CFMX than in CF5. I have no > > idea about WDDX. Do you *think* it is slower? Have you written a test case > > and *proved* there is a noticeable difference? Why don't you try it for > > yourself. > > > > Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ > > > > "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." > > -- Margaret Atwood > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
