Re: CF Forum 2000
Jim Davis wrote: > Actually - if I remember correctly - CF Forums was never encrypted. So > no matter what version you have you should be able to dig in. I have looked it over a few times over the last years, but since it was never released under an OSI approved Open Source license I never released any code. And with all the new features that MX offers, it is probably better to start from scratch. Jochem [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CF Forum 2000
Uh oh, my bad. I was talking about the old Allaire forums which went open-source. http://www.houseoffusion.com/forumspot Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Che Vilnonis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 10:46 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CF Forum 2000 Help me out...are we talking about the following forum here??? http://www.cfcode.com/index.cfm/fuse/forumdetails.htm Let me know...Ché -Original Message- From: Mark A. Kruger - CFG [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 10:43 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CF Forum 2000 Yes but. it looks nice. -Original Message- From: Adam Wayne Lehman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 9:35 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CF Forum 2000 Run, do not walk away from cfForums. It is a curse. It's one of the most poorly written applications I've seen. I've read every single line of code, and my god, it's junk. We had over 30 forums and it was slow and unresponsive. Not to mention debugging the application and/or integrating it is a feat in patience. The code is so disorganized and backasswards. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 3:19 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CF Forum 2000 Actually - if I remember correctly - CF Forums was never encrypted. So no matter what version you have you should be able to dig in. My main issue with it is that the fundamental codebase for CF Forums was begun with CF 2.0 and was maintained on a "oh, do we HAVE to!" budget and timeline. It was a fine piece of software 5 or six years ago, but it's age is just too apparent now. Jim Davis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 2:04 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CF Forum 2000 Yes, maybe, and yes. :) If you are talking about rewriting it I assume you have the open source version. CF Forums main bottleneck is that it uses subqueries to generate the message counts. Get a lot of messages, or a lot of forums and it starts to blow a gasket. It's also been a while and there may be a new version out...so my experience may be outdated here. The key optimizations that needs to be done it start precalculating those topic totals, etc, remove all the looped over queries, then start in caching. In the end I was able to get a forum with 50! forums and over 75,000 messages displaying in sub 100ms times with a single user, before any db optimizations. Under load it did well...can't remember times though. -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, October 17, 2003, 12:21:35 AM, you wrote: RS> Hi all, RS> Has anyone here implemented a high volume site using CF FORUM 2000? RS> We have just inherited one, and am wondering how solid the code is. RS> Its a very busy forum, doing about 3 gigs of traffic per day, and its RS> started to show signs of breaking down, e.g. deadlock errors, RS> timeouts, "No more data available to read" errors. RS> Should I be looking for different forum software? Or re-write the code RS> myself? RS> Has anyone done an optimisation job on the CFFORUM code and can give a RS> few pointers on where the bottlenecks are? RS> thanks, bye! _ _ _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CF Forum 2000
Help me out...are we talking about the following forum here??? http://www.cfcode.com/index.cfm/fuse/forumdetails.htm Let me know...Ché -Original Message- From: Mark A. Kruger - CFG [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 10:43 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CF Forum 2000 Yes but. it looks nice. -Original Message- From: Adam Wayne Lehman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 9:35 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CF Forum 2000 Run, do not walk away from cfForums. It is a curse. It's one of the most poorly written applications I've seen. I've read every single line of code, and my god, it's junk. We had over 30 forums and it was slow and unresponsive. Not to mention debugging the application and/or integrating it is a feat in patience. The code is so disorganized and backasswards. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 3:19 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CF Forum 2000 Actually - if I remember correctly - CF Forums was never encrypted. So no matter what version you have you should be able to dig in. My main issue with it is that the fundamental codebase for CF Forums was begun with CF 2.0 and was maintained on a "oh, do we HAVE to!" budget and timeline. It was a fine piece of software 5 or six years ago, but it's age is just too apparent now. Jim Davis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 2:04 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CF Forum 2000 Yes, maybe, and yes. :) If you are talking about rewriting it I assume you have the open source version. CF Forums main bottleneck is that it uses subqueries to generate the message counts. Get a lot of messages, or a lot of forums and it starts to blow a gasket. It's also been a while and there may be a new version out...so my experience may be outdated here. The key optimizations that needs to be done it start precalculating those topic totals, etc, remove all the looped over queries, then start in caching. In the end I was able to get a forum with 50! forums and over 75,000 messages displaying in sub 100ms times with a single user, before any db optimizations. Under load it did well...can't remember times though. -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, October 17, 2003, 12:21:35 AM, you wrote: RS> Hi all, RS> Has anyone here implemented a high volume site using CF FORUM 2000? RS> We have just inherited one, and am wondering how solid the code is. RS> Its a very busy forum, doing about 3 gigs of traffic per day, and its RS> started to show signs of breaking down, e.g. deadlock errors, RS> timeouts, "No more data available to read" errors. RS> Should I be looking for different forum software? Or re-write the code RS> myself? RS> Has anyone done an optimisation job on the CFFORUM code and can give a RS> few pointers on where the bottlenecks are? RS> thanks, bye! _ _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CF Forum 2000
Yes but. it looks nice. -Original Message- From: Adam Wayne Lehman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 9:35 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CF Forum 2000 Run, do not walk away from cfForums. It is a curse. It's one of the most poorly written applications I've seen. I've read every single line of code, and my god, it's junk. We had over 30 forums and it was slow and unresponsive. Not to mention debugging the application and/or integrating it is a feat in patience. The code is so disorganized and backasswards. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 3:19 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CF Forum 2000 Actually - if I remember correctly - CF Forums was never encrypted. So no matter what version you have you should be able to dig in. My main issue with it is that the fundamental codebase for CF Forums was begun with CF 2.0 and was maintained on a "oh, do we HAVE to!" budget and timeline. It was a fine piece of software 5 or six years ago, but it's age is just too apparent now. Jim Davis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 2:04 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CF Forum 2000 Yes, maybe, and yes. :) If you are talking about rewriting it I assume you have the open source version. CF Forums main bottleneck is that it uses subqueries to generate the message counts. Get a lot of messages, or a lot of forums and it starts to blow a gasket. It's also been a while and there may be a new version out...so my experience may be outdated here. The key optimizations that needs to be done it start precalculating those topic totals, etc, remove all the looped over queries, then start in caching. In the end I was able to get a forum with 50! forums and over 75,000 messages displaying in sub 100ms times with a single user, before any db optimizations. Under load it did well...can't remember times though. -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, October 17, 2003, 12:21:35 AM, you wrote: RS> Hi all, RS> Has anyone here implemented a high volume site using CF FORUM 2000? RS> We have just inherited one, and am wondering how solid the code is. RS> Its a very busy forum, doing about 3 gigs of traffic per day, and its RS> started to show signs of breaking down, e.g. deadlock errors, RS> timeouts, "No more data available to read" errors. RS> Should I be looking for different forum software? Or re-write the code RS> myself? RS> Has anyone done an optimisation job on the CFFORUM code and can give a RS> few pointers on where the bottlenecks are? RS> thanks, bye! _ _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CF Forum 2000
Run, do not walk away from cfForums. It is a curse. It's one of the most poorly written applications I've seen. I've read every single line of code, and my god, it's junk. We had over 30 forums and it was slow and unresponsive. Not to mention debugging the application and/or integrating it is a feat in patience. The code is so disorganized and backasswards. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 3:19 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CF Forum 2000 Actually - if I remember correctly - CF Forums was never encrypted. So no matter what version you have you should be able to dig in. My main issue with it is that the fundamental codebase for CF Forums was begun with CF 2.0 and was maintained on a "oh, do we HAVE to!" budget and timeline. It was a fine piece of software 5 or six years ago, but it's age is just too apparent now. Jim Davis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 2:04 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CF Forum 2000 Yes, maybe, and yes. :) If you are talking about rewriting it I assume you have the open source version. CF Forums main bottleneck is that it uses subqueries to generate the message counts. Get a lot of messages, or a lot of forums and it starts to blow a gasket. It's also been a while and there may be a new version out...so my experience may be outdated here. The key optimizations that needs to be done it start precalculating those topic totals, etc, remove all the looped over queries, then start in caching. In the end I was able to get a forum with 50! forums and over 75,000 messages displaying in sub 100ms times with a single user, before any db optimizations. Under load it did well...can't remember times though. -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, October 17, 2003, 12:21:35 AM, you wrote: RS> Hi all, RS> Has anyone here implemented a high volume site using CF FORUM 2000? RS> We have just inherited one, and am wondering how solid the code is. RS> Its a very busy forum, doing about 3 gigs of traffic per day, and its RS> started to show signs of breaking down, e.g. deadlock errors, RS> timeouts, "No more data available to read" errors. RS> Should I be looking for different forum software? Or re-write the code RS> myself? RS> Has anyone done an optimisation job on the CFFORUM code and can give a RS> few pointers on where the bottlenecks are? RS> thanks, bye! _ _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CF Forum 2000
Actually - if I remember correctly - CF Forums was never encrypted. So no matter what version you have you should be able to dig in. My main issue with it is that the fundamental codebase for CF Forums was begun with CF 2.0 and was maintained on a "oh, do we HAVE to!" budget and timeline. It was a fine piece of software 5 or six years ago, but it's age is just too apparent now. Jim Davis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 2:04 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CF Forum 2000 Yes, maybe, and yes. :) If you are talking about rewriting it I assume you have the open source version. CF Forums main bottleneck is that it uses subqueries to generate the message counts. Get a lot of messages, or a lot of forums and it starts to blow a gasket. It's also been a while and there may be a new version out...so my experience may be outdated here. The key optimizations that needs to be done it start precalculating those topic totals, etc, remove all the looped over queries, then start in caching. In the end I was able to get a forum with 50! forums and over 75,000 messages displaying in sub 100ms times with a single user, before any db optimizations. Under load it did well...can't remember times though. -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, October 17, 2003, 12:21:35 AM, you wrote: RS> Hi all, RS> Has anyone here implemented a high volume site using CF FORUM 2000? RS> We have just inherited one, and am wondering how solid the code is. RS> Its a very busy forum, doing about 3 gigs of traffic per day, and its RS> started to show signs of breaking down, e.g. deadlock errors, RS> timeouts, "No more data available to read" errors. RS> Should I be looking for different forum software? Or re-write the code RS> myself? RS> Has anyone done an optimisation job on the CFFORUM code and can give a RS> few pointers on where the bottlenecks are? RS> thanks, bye! _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: CF Forum 2000
Yes, maybe, and yes. :) If you are talking about rewriting it I assume you have the open source version. CF Forums main bottleneck is that it uses subqueries to generate the message counts. Get a lot of messages, or a lot of forums and it starts to blow a gasket. It's also been a while and there may be a new version out...so my experience may be outdated here. The key optimizations that needs to be done it start precalculating those topic totals, etc, remove all the looped over queries, then start in caching. In the end I was able to get a forum with 50! forums and over 75,000 messages displaying in sub 100ms times with a single user, before any db optimizations. Under load it did well...can't remember times though. -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, October 17, 2003, 12:21:35 AM, you wrote: RS> Hi all, RS> Has anyone here implemented a high volume site using CF FORUM 2000? RS> We have just inherited one, and am wondering how solid the code is. RS> Its a very busy forum, doing about 3 gigs of traffic per day, and its RS> started to show signs of breaking down, e.g. deadlock errors, RS> timeouts, "No more data available to read" errors. RS> Should I be looking for different forum software? Or re-write the code RS> myself? RS> Has anyone done an optimisation job on the CFFORUM code and can give a RS> few pointers on where the bottlenecks are? RS> thanks, bye! [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
re: CF Forum 2000
Is the forum using Access or SQL Server? If it is using Access then up the database to SQL Server and that should help alot. Clint Tredway www.digital12studios.com Original Message: Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Thu Oct 16 21:25:44 2003 >Received: from houseoffusion.com [64.118.64.245] by mail16.crystaltech.com with SMTP; > Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:25:44 -0700 >Received: from LOCALHOST by LOCALHOST > with ESMTP id 17CC6E829D9BA3479E8EF2803401F19A > Fri, 17 Oct 2003 00:27:32 -0400 >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 14:21:35 +1000 >From: Ryan Sabir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Precedence: bulk >References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: CF Forum 2000 >To: CF-Talk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="_NextPart_000_1066350452_CFX_iMSMail_141555966" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > >Hi all, > >Has anyone here implemented a high volume site using CF FORUM 2000? > >We have just inherited one, and am wondering how solid the code is. >Its a very busy forum, doing about 3 gigs of traffic per day, and its >started to show signs of breaking down, e.g. deadlock errors, >timeouts, "No more data available to read" errors. > >Should I be looking for different forum software? Or re-write the code >myself? > >Has anyone done an optimisation job on the CFFORUM code and can give a >few pointers on where the bottlenecks are? > >thanks, bye! > >--- >Ryan Sabir >Newgency Pty Ltd >2a Broughton St >Paddington 2021 >Sydney, Australia >Ph (02) 9331 2133 >Fax (02) 9331 5199 >Mobile: 0411 512 454 >http://www.newgency.com/index.cfm?referer=rysig > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
