> CF 5 did release memory, while CF 4.0.1 didn't. I don't remember whether > CF 4.5.1 did or not.
Thanks for the correction. I meant 4.0.1. We developed for and hosted on ColdFusion 4.0.1 until some time after 5 was released. Then we moved most of our stuff to 5. We are now migrating most of our stuff to ColdFusion MX 6.1, which seems to perform much better and seems to be much more stable than ColdFusion MX itself (I guess the version number was 6.0?). > We have had clients with CF 4 and CF 5 who had poor response times when > they heavily used custom tags, even for relatively simple tasks. After > restructuring their application to use fewer custom tags where possible, > they saw significantly improved response times with load testing and on > their live site. Fortunately, this doesn't seem to be nearly as serious an > issue with CFMX. That's good to know. We were load testing to ensure sites could handle a certain load (preventative). We do not get much in the way of customers looking for us to host applications that we did not write, much less performance tuning such sites. As noted in a previous message in this thread, we're not building large scale sites. Our sites tend to host under 1 million user sessions a month. Most of our sites see much less than this. No single site requires more than one Web server. When we load test, we're looking for bottlenecks, stability, and performance under a moderate load. Thanks for the clarification. Ben Rogers http://www.c4.net v.508.240.0051 f.508.240.0057 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:185858 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
