Russ, Correct. But my main point was not for a onesey twosey environment / shop. It's the big sites that have 30+ boxes. An extra MS SQL read is a lot less than 6k per box (example: $180,000.00 vs. an extra SQL read 5,000.00 or so).
The session is almost invisible by way of consumed resources on the network and on the servers. *The SQL .NET Data provider removes the data access layer: http://dotnetguru.org/articles/us/JDBCvsADO.NET/JDBC_ADONET.pdf -- I am not saying CF is bad. The entire point of my posts is simply an appeal to Abode for pricing reform in order to get more market share and make more CF jobs for everyone :) --Phil -----Original Message----- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 12:37 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CF vs. .NET presentations? You still need some sort of central DB server, so it's still putting extra load on a server (either shared with your regular server or another piece of hardware for which you'll have to pay even more $). CF uses JRUN clustering which basically communicates from one node to another. I'm not sure which one is more efficient, but my guess is the JRUN one is. You can edit one of the files, and tell JRUN to store session info in the db, so it's not much harder then doing it in ASP. CF just gives you more options. Russ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:254808 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
