Re: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
> Some locking hits are row based: > > SELECT column > FROM table WITH (ROWLOCK). i stand corrected. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Scheduled Task question?
I'd be willing to bet that there's no way around having your scheduled
tasks show up in the cfadmin ide in MX ... You're probably better off
finding a 3rd-party http tool you can use with the Windows task
scheduler. Since that won't be managed by the CF engine, it won't show
up in the administrator. I haven't done it myself, I've seen people
talk about doing it on the list tho, and my impression is that there's
at least one decent free http tool that will work under Windows.
hth
> I tried the following:
> Created the cron job in the cfide. Then I went to the
> CFusionMX/lib
> directory and looked at the neo-cron.xml file.
> Sure enough my entry was there.
> So I copied the entry in the neo-cron.xml, went back to
> the cfide and
> deleted the manual entry I made in the Scheduled Tasks
> setting. Sure enough
> it cleared out the neo-cron file.
> So I then pasted the earlier copied (old version with the
> entry) contents
> into neo-cron.xml. Just like it was when I created the
> entry through the
> cfide.
> Ok, all seemed well, the entry was gone in the CFIDE like
> I wantedbut
> when I went to refresh the CFIDE screen where the
> scheduled tasks appear it
> must do a manual sweep of the xml directories because it
> kept cleaning out
> the file contents in neo-cron.xml...any thoughts
> Steve
> -Original Message-
> From: Schuster, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 9:21 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Scheduled Task question?
> In MX 6.1 does a scheduled task have to exist in the CF
> Administrator for it
> to work. I was able to add them to the registry in 5 so
> they would not
> appear in the CF Administrator and get hosed up by
> developers poking around.
> Any ideas? I was thinking it was just an XML entry in 6.1
> but was not sure
> where it was stored?
> Steve
> -Original Message-
> From: Ian Vaughan
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 9:24 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Date Errors in MX ?
> Jochem
> I have just changed the query to what is below and
> received the
> following error
> Error Occurred While Processing Request
> Error Executing Database Query.
> [Macromedia][Oracle JDBC Driver][Oracle]ORA-00911: invalid
> character
> The error occurred in
> F:\Websites\Intranet\itintranet\publishing\articleaction.c
> fm: line 54
> 52 :
> value="#security#">,
> 53 :
> isdefined("file.serverFile")>'#file.serverFile#'NU
> LL,
> 54 :
> value="#content#">;
> 55 :
> 56 :
>
>
> SELECT Max(id) NewID
> FROM itarticle
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> form.event_day & "/" &
> form.event_year>
>
>
> "MM/DD/")>
>
> "]*>", "", "ALL")>
>
> "]*>", "", "ALL")>
>
>
> destination="F:\Websites\Intranet\itintranet\itnews\images
> \"
> nameconflict="OVERWRITE">
>
>
>
>
> name="insert_query">
> INSERT INTO itarticle (id, articledate, articletitle,
> articlesummary,
> articleauthor, security, imgsrc, articlebody)
> VALUES (
>
> value="#articledate#">,
>
> value="#articletitle#">,
>
> value="#articlesummary#">,
>
> value="#Session.Fname#
> #Session.Lname#">,
>
> value="#security#">,
>
> isdefined("file.serverFile")>'#file.serverFile#'NU
> LL,
>
> value="#content#">
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 22 December 2003 12:08
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Date Errors in MX ?
> Ian Vaughan said:
>>
>>
> It would be better to use a sequence for primary key
> generation.
> If
> you also use cfqueryparam your 3 query transaction reduces
> to 1
> query.
>
> CreateDate(form.event_year,form.event_month,form.event_day
> >
>
> REReplacenocase(content,"]*>","","ALL")>
>
> name="insert_query">
> INSERT INTO itarticle (
> articledate,
> articletitle,
> etc.
> itarticle
> )
> VALUES (
>
> value="#storydate#">,
>
> value="#articletitle#">,
> etc.
>
> value="#content#">
>
> Jochem
>
> _
> _
>
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
Re: Strange Permission Errors
May not be a CF issue per se... I suspect they've got separate permissions somewhere that prevent java from accessing the network like a firewall. Though if it were a firewall issue, I'd expect something different as an error, like timeout... this isn't really my area, I'm just throwing out ideas. :) > On a shared host someone is trying to use CFHTTP to grab > an RSS feed. The > error that they are getting is: > The following is the internal exception message: access > denied > (java.net.SocketPermission HYPERLINK > "http://www.easycfm.com/" > \nwww.easycfm.com resolve) > The one thing that is known is that the host has > restricted access to > CFExecute and CFRegistry. All other tags are open. > Anyone have any suggestions on this one? > Thanks! > Hatton > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: > 12/5/2003 > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Error Handling - List of possible return values
Here as well: http://livedocs.macromedia.com/coldfusion/6.1/htmldocs/tags-a10.htm#wp 3395038 > http://livedocs.macromedia.com/coldfusion/6.1/htmldocs/err > ors8.htm > -Original Message- > From: Kevin Marino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: dinsdag 23 december 2003 16:20 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Error Handling - List of possible return values > Was wondering is there a list of coldfusion error types > returned by > #error.type# > Ask because even though I designated the custom exception > type of > "framework" , I got back > coldfusion.runtime.CfErrorWrapper > Thanks > Kevin > _ > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Passing CFTHROW errorcode to CFERROR Template
that's rather strange... iirc the error generated in the template specified by cferror should be identical to any error that would be generated by cfthrow-cfcatch. You might rewrite it temporarily with throw-catch to test and see what results you get. > It seems I can't pass a CFTHROW "errorCode" back to a > CFERROR Template. I do > not get an error just no value also type comes back as > "coldfusion.runtime.CfErrorWrapper" > The CFERROR is a site wide error handler so errorcodes > could be different, > but template is same. Outside of having rewrite using > CFCATCH, is there a > way I can get the information I need (errorcode). > Thanks > Kevin > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
> > > Ooops I meant "suggest locking" not "suggest isolation > > > levels". You can of course set isolation levels in CF and > > > this is the way CF recommends locking type to the DB. > > > > Again, though, I don't think this is a recommendation - I'm > > pretty sure that whatever you choose for your isolation level > > will tell the database exactly how to impose and honor locks. > > Well, this isn't strictly true either. Some databases can > escalate locks above what you've specified - this is usually > a good thing though. Yes, I've oversimplified things a bit; I apologize. I stand by my statement that the isolation level isn't a recommendation, which is what I was getting at. In no case will the database ever say, "well, you don't need this transaction to be serializable, so I won't bother setting any locks". The database may well escalate the scope of a lock, locking a page or a table instead of two or more individual records, and it may place a stronger lock as a result of that. As far as I can tell, within your transaction all you can really specify are whether locks will be placed and whether they'll be honored, and whether those locks will apply to the records being touched or to the dataset which describes those records. Those specifications will be honored. (I'll note that I probably oversimplified a sentence or two here, as well.) But in any case, this kind of argument emphasizes the importance of understanding how your database works when you want to write transactional processing code. This isn't trivial or necessarily obvious stuff, but too few CF developers understand it sufficiently, I think. For that matter, I'm not sure I understand it sufficiently! Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
Well, this isn't strictly true either. Some databases can escalate locks above what you've specified - this is usually a good thing though. -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: December 24, 2003 1:32 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK > Ooops I meant "suggest locking" not "suggest isolation > levels". You can of course set isolation levels in CF and > this is the way CF recommends locking type to the DB. Again, though, I don't think this is a recommendation - I'm pretty sure that whatever you choose for your isolation level will tell the database exactly how to impose and honor locks. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
Believe it or not, the book is wrong. -Original Message- From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: January 8, 2004 1:15 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK I am just saying what I read in "Certified Cold fusion developer study guide" by Ben Forta. page 161 top - "SERIALIZABLE is the highest isolation level provided by a database and is the defalut." If you are absolutely sure that this is not the case tell Ben about it. TK - Original Message - From: Kwang Suh To: CF-Talk Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 1:39 PM Subject: RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK No, serializable is not the default level. Automatically serializing transactions would be a huge performance killer. -Original Message- From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: December 24, 2003 9:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK "If you're using SQL Server 2000, on the other hand, this may not be sufficient, since SQL Server 2000 can lock individual records. So, in that case, you'd want to specify a stricter isolation level, such as "serializable". You can do this using the ISOLATION attribute of CFTRANSACTION" Actually, you can only suggest isolation levels to DB, the DB is the one that sets isolation levels and does what it think is the best thing. Also, correct me if I am wrong, but "serializable" is the default setting for cftransaction tag. TK -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 11:44 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK > I have piece of code below: > > > > INSERT INTO tbl_Main (adadadadadadadada) > VALUES (dadadadadadad) > > > SELECT MAX ID from tbl_Main > > > > The question that I have is do I also need to include > with this. I have been told that I should by some > people and not by others. Does CFTRANACTION automatically do > a lock or do you need to specify it. The short answer is, no, you probably don't need to use CFLOCK with this, and you don't need to use CFLOCK with database transactions in general. In general, the only time you need to use CFLOCK is when you have something in your CF code that you don't want multiple people to be able to interact with in specific ways at the same time. The longer answer is that to address these issues, you really have to have a thorough understanding of how databases handle transactions and locking. The whole purpose of CFTRANSACTION is to let you tell the database that a series of queries should be treated as a single transaction. Whenever you talk to the database from CF using CFQUERY or CFSTOREDPROC, you will be conducting one or more transactions with the database. The database will lock records as appropriate during any transaction - locking is central to multi-user functionality within most DBMSs. In the above case, where you're inserting and then fetching the database-generated primary key, you may need to tell the database what kind of transaction you want, however. The default isolation level for most databases is something called "read committed", which will create a transaction that places exclusive locks for the duration of changes, that places shared locks for the duration of reads, and that will honor any existing locks it encounters. If you're using Access, this would be sufficient to ensure that no one else could insert a record until your transaction is complete, since Access would lock the entire table for the duration of the transaction. If you're using SQL Server 2000, on the other hand, this may not be sufficient, since SQL Server 2000 can lock individual records. So, in that case, you'd want to specify a stricter isolation level, such as "serializable". You can do this using the ISOLATION attribute of CFTRANSACTION: ... However, if you're using something like SQL Server, you can avoid this problem by using database-specific functionality, like @@IDENTITY or SCOPE_IDENTITY, which will let you return the identity of the inserted record directly. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 _ _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
Tom Kitta wrote: > I am just saying what I read in "Certified Cold fusion developer study guide" by Ben Forta. page 161 top - "SERIALIZABLE is the highest isolation level provided by a database and is the defalut." If you are absolutely sure that this is not the case tell Ben about it. The standard says it is the default. Not many databases follow the standard. Jochem -- I don't get it immigrants don't work and steal our jobs - Loesje [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
> Ooops I meant "suggest locking" not "suggest isolation > levels". You can of course set isolation levels in CF and > this is the way CF recommends locking type to the DB. Again, though, I don't think this is a recommendation - I'm pretty sure that whatever you choose for your isolation level will tell the database exactly how to impose and honor locks. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
Ooops I meant "suggest locking" not "suggest isolation levels". You can of course set isolation levels in CF and this is the way CF recommends locking type to the DB. TK -Original Message- From: Paul Hastings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: December 24, 2003 10:23 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK > > Actually, you can only suggest isolation levels to DB, the DB > > is the one that sets isolation levels and does what it think > > is the best thing. > > While I imagine this could be true for some database, it certainly isn't > true for either SQL Server or Oracle. I don't even think it's true for > locking hints in SQL Server, although I use them infrequently enough that I > could be wrong about that. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
I am just saying what I read in "Certified Cold fusion developer study guide" by Ben Forta. page 161 top - "SERIALIZABLE is the highest isolation level provided by a database and is the defalut." If you are absolutely sure that this is not the case tell Ben about it. TK - Original Message - From: Kwang Suh To: CF-Talk Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 1:39 PM Subject: RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK No, serializable is not the default level. Automatically serializing transactions would be a huge performance killer. -Original Message- From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: December 24, 2003 9:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK "If you're using SQL Server 2000, on the other hand, this may not be sufficient, since SQL Server 2000 can lock individual records. So, in that case, you'd want to specify a stricter isolation level, such as "serializable". You can do this using the ISOLATION attribute of CFTRANSACTION" Actually, you can only suggest isolation levels to DB, the DB is the one that sets isolation levels and does what it think is the best thing. Also, correct me if I am wrong, but "serializable" is the default setting for cftransaction tag. TK -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 11:44 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK > I have piece of code below: > > > > INSERT INTO tbl_Main (adadadadadadadada) > VALUES (dadadadadadad) > > > SELECT MAX ID from tbl_Main > > > > The question that I have is do I also need to include > with this. I have been told that I should by some > people and not by others. Does CFTRANACTION automatically do > a lock or do you need to specify it. The short answer is, no, you probably don't need to use CFLOCK with this, and you don't need to use CFLOCK with database transactions in general. In general, the only time you need to use CFLOCK is when you have something in your CF code that you don't want multiple people to be able to interact with in specific ways at the same time. The longer answer is that to address these issues, you really have to have a thorough understanding of how databases handle transactions and locking. The whole purpose of CFTRANSACTION is to let you tell the database that a series of queries should be treated as a single transaction. Whenever you talk to the database from CF using CFQUERY or CFSTOREDPROC, you will be conducting one or more transactions with the database. The database will lock records as appropriate during any transaction - locking is central to multi-user functionality within most DBMSs. In the above case, where you're inserting and then fetching the database-generated primary key, you may need to tell the database what kind of transaction you want, however. The default isolation level for most databases is something called "read committed", which will create a transaction that places exclusive locks for the duration of changes, that places shared locks for the duration of reads, and that will honor any existing locks it encounters. If you're using Access, this would be sufficient to ensure that no one else could insert a record until your transaction is complete, since Access would lock the entire table for the duration of the transaction. If you're using SQL Server 2000, on the other hand, this may not be sufficient, since SQL Server 2000 can lock individual records. So, in that case, you'd want to specify a stricter isolation level, such as "serializable". You can do this using the ISOLATION attribute of CFTRANSACTION: ... However, if you're using something like SQL Server, you can avoid this problem by using database-specific functionality, like @@IDENTITY or SCOPE_IDENTITY, which will let you return the identity of the inserted record directly. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
> Well, in fact, you probably will need cflock around this _if_ > the database does not support serialized transactions. I think this would depend on the granularity of the locks within the database. If you were using Access, again, I think this would work fine with the default isolation level of "read committed", as the first query would place an exclusive lock on the entire table. As a result, no one else would be able to touch the table at all until the end of the transaction. I only point this out to illustrate the potential complexity of transactional processing issues - you have to know something about how your database handles transactions to determine how you should write transactions. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
Well, in fact, you probably will need cflock around this _if_ the database does not support serialized transactions. But then again, doing this method if getting the primary key is stupid, stupid, stupid. -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: December 24, 2003 9:44 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK > I have piece of code below: > > > > INSERT INTO tbl_Main (adadadadadadadada) > VALUES (dadadadadadad) > > > SELECT MAX ID from tbl_Main > > > > The question that I have is do I also need to include > with this. I have been told that I should by some > people and not by others. Does CFTRANACTION automatically do > a lock or do you need to specify it. The short answer is, no, you probably don't need to use CFLOCK with this, and you don't need to use CFLOCK with database transactions in general. In general, the only time you need to use CFLOCK is when you have something in your CF code that you don't want multiple people to be able to interact with in specific ways at the same time. The longer answer is that to address these issues, you really have to have a thorough understanding of how databases handle transactions and locking. The whole purpose of CFTRANSACTION is to let you tell the database that a series of queries should be treated as a single transaction. Whenever you talk to the database from CF using CFQUERY or CFSTOREDPROC, you will be conducting one or more transactions with the database. The database will lock records as appropriate during any transaction - locking is central to multi-user functionality within most DBMSs. In the above case, where you're inserting and then fetching the database-generated primary key, you may need to tell the database what kind of transaction you want, however. The default isolation level for most databases is something called "read committed", which will create a transaction that places exclusive locks for the duration of changes, that places shared locks for the duration of reads, and that will honor any existing locks it encounters. If you're using Access, this would be sufficient to ensure that no one else could insert a record until your transaction is complete, since Access would lock the entire table for the duration of the transaction. If you're using SQL Server 2000, on the other hand, this may not be sufficient, since SQL Server 2000 can lock individual records. So, in that case, you'd want to specify a stricter isolation level, such as "serializable". You can do this using the ISOLATION attribute of CFTRANSACTION: ... However, if you're using something like SQL Server, you can avoid this problem by using database-specific functionality, like @@IDENTITY or SCOPE_IDENTITY, which will let you return the identity of the inserted record directly. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT - MySQL - MyISAM or InnoDB
Thanks all and you Barney. Great explanation. Cheers - Original Message - From: "Barney Boisvert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 09:23:30 -0800 To: CF-Talk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: OT - MySQL - MyISAM or InnoDB InnoDB is nice for the transactions and foreign key support (though as Jochem points out every time, it's not technically complete). However, it's 100% usable. MyISAM are really fast, and easier to work with for backups and stuff that InnoDB, because the tables are stored on the filesystem directly, while InnoDB uses a "tablespace", which is basically a virtual file system composed of one or more files. That tablespace gives you the ability to have HUGE single tables, because you can split them across multiple files, which can help you avoid OS-based file size limits. MyISAM also gives you the ability to do FULLTEXT indexes, so you can do search engine-style searches as well as the normal LIKE and REGEXP searches. If the answer isn't clear, I'd default to InnoDB, because they have more potentially useful features, and the speed isn't that much different. The only time I'd go for MyISAM is if I knew FULLTEXT was going to be really useful, or performance was going to be incredibly important. Cheers, barneyb > -Original Message- > From: Spectrum WebDesign [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 3:56 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: OT - MySQL - MyISAM or InnoDB > > After using MS SQL Server for years today we're using MySQL > for a CF website project. What's the best table type for that > project: InnoDB(transaction MySQL table) or MyISAM(no > transaction)? Why? > > Thanks > > > > > > -- > ___ > Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com > http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
No, serializable is not the default level. Automatically serializing transactions would be a huge performance killer. -Original Message- From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: December 24, 2003 9:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK "If you're using SQL Server 2000, on the other hand, this may not be sufficient, since SQL Server 2000 can lock individual records. So, in that case, you'd want to specify a stricter isolation level, such as "serializable". You can do this using the ISOLATION attribute of CFTRANSACTION" Actually, you can only suggest isolation levels to DB, the DB is the one that sets isolation levels and does what it think is the best thing. Also, correct me if I am wrong, but "serializable" is the default setting for cftransaction tag. TK -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 11:44 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK > I have piece of code below: > > > > INSERT INTO tbl_Main (adadadadadadadada) > VALUES (dadadadadadad) > > > SELECT MAX ID from tbl_Main > > > > The question that I have is do I also need to include > with this. I have been told that I should by some > people and not by others. Does CFTRANACTION automatically do > a lock or do you need to specify it. The short answer is, no, you probably don't need to use CFLOCK with this, and you don't need to use CFLOCK with database transactions in general. In general, the only time you need to use CFLOCK is when you have something in your CF code that you don't want multiple people to be able to interact with in specific ways at the same time. The longer answer is that to address these issues, you really have to have a thorough understanding of how databases handle transactions and locking. The whole purpose of CFTRANSACTION is to let you tell the database that a series of queries should be treated as a single transaction. Whenever you talk to the database from CF using CFQUERY or CFSTOREDPROC, you will be conducting one or more transactions with the database. The database will lock records as appropriate during any transaction - locking is central to multi-user functionality within most DBMSs. In the above case, where you're inserting and then fetching the database-generated primary key, you may need to tell the database what kind of transaction you want, however. The default isolation level for most databases is something called "read committed", which will create a transaction that places exclusive locks for the duration of changes, that places shared locks for the duration of reads, and that will honor any existing locks it encounters. If you're using Access, this would be sufficient to ensure that no one else could insert a record until your transaction is complete, since Access would lock the entire table for the duration of the transaction. If you're using SQL Server 2000, on the other hand, this may not be sufficient, since SQL Server 2000 can lock individual records. So, in that case, you'd want to specify a stricter isolation level, such as "serializable". You can do this using the ISOLATION attribute of CFTRANSACTION: ... However, if you're using something like SQL Server, you can avoid this problem by using database-specific functionality, like @@IDENTITY or SCOPE_IDENTITY, which will let you return the identity of the inserted record directly. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
Some locking hits are row based: SELECT column FROM table WITH (ROWLOCK). -Original Message- From: Paul Hastings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: December 24, 2003 10:23 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK > > Actually, you can only suggest isolation levels to DB, the DB > > is the one that sets isolation levels and does what it think > > is the best thing. > > While I imagine this could be true for some database, it certainly isn't > true for either SQL Server or Oracle. I don't even think it's true for > locking hints in SQL Server, although I use them infrequently enough that I > could be wrong about that. for sql server no explicit locking hint or transaction isolation level hands this decision off to the optimizer which determines the (usually) best type of locking to apply. as far as i know & from what i can find in BoL, locking hints are 100% enforced except for transactions that muck with the "schema stability" (can't have you ripping a table's innards apart while joe blow is updating it). ditto for isolation levels. btw locking hints are table level. _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Flashpaper Macromedia - Please
I hope someone at MM is listening. I just tried to read ColdFusion MX 6.1 Evaluator's Guide aluators_guide.pdf> as a PDF file from here http://www.macromedia.com/software/coldfusion/whitepapers/ and after the usual painful PDF browser wait got a blank screen which appeared frozen in time. I am really tired of bloody PDFs in a browser; they have to be one of the worst web experiences out there, period. So if youre listening at MM, can please at least have the option to get PDF s in Flashpaper format on Macromedias site. Apart from enabling site visitors to actually efficiently read stuff it would be a great plug for your own products. As an experiment, we took last months PDF version of ColdFusion Developers Journal (a 52 page behemoth) and created a Flashpaper version. The difference in load time in a browser is startling. There are native downsides to Flashpaper, no search, cannot select text etc but for simply reading a document in a browser Flashpaper really rocks. Oh and thanks MM for a bloody amazing year, Seasons Greetings to one and all. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt Webapper Services LLC Web Site http://www.webapper.com Blog http://www.webapper.net Webapper [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT - MySQL - MyISAM or InnoDB
InnoDB is nice for the transactions and foreign key support (though as Jochem points out every time, it's not technically complete). However, it's 100% usable. MyISAM are really fast, and easier to work with for backups and stuff that InnoDB, because the tables are stored on the filesystem directly, while InnoDB uses a "tablespace", which is basically a virtual file system composed of one or more files. That tablespace gives you the ability to have HUGE single tables, because you can split them across multiple files, which can help you avoid OS-based file size limits. MyISAM also gives you the ability to do FULLTEXT indexes, so you can do search engine-style searches as well as the normal LIKE and REGEXP searches. If the answer isn't clear, I'd default to InnoDB, because they have more potentially useful features, and the speed isn't that much different. The only time I'd go for MyISAM is if I knew FULLTEXT was going to be really useful, or performance was going to be incredibly important. Cheers, barneyb > -Original Message- > From: Spectrum WebDesign [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 3:56 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: OT - MySQL - MyISAM or InnoDB > > After using MS SQL Server for years today we're using MySQL > for a CF website project. What's the best table type for that > project: InnoDB(transaction MySQL table) or MyISAM(no > transaction)? Why? > > Thanks > > > > > > -- > ___ > Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com > http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
> > Actually, you can only suggest isolation levels to DB, the DB > > is the one that sets isolation levels and does what it think > > is the best thing. > > While I imagine this could be true for some database, it certainly isn't > true for either SQL Server or Oracle. I don't even think it's true for > locking hints in SQL Server, although I use them infrequently enough that I > could be wrong about that. for sql server no explicit locking hint or transaction isolation level hands this decision off to the optimizer which determines the (usually) best type of locking to apply. as far as i know & from what i can find in BoL, locking hints are 100% enforced except for transactions that muck with the "schema stability" (can't have you ripping a table's innards apart while joe blow is updating it). ditto for isolation levels. btw locking hints are table level. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
> Actually, you can only suggest isolation levels to DB, the DB > is the one that sets isolation levels and does what it think > is the best thing. While I imagine this could be true for some database, it certainly isn't true for either SQL Server or Oracle. I don't even think it's true for locking hints in SQL Server, although I use them infrequently enough that I could be wrong about that. > Also, correct me if I am wrong, but "serializable" is the default > setting for cftransaction tag. As far as I can tell, this is wrong. The default value is unspecified by CF, and is dependent on your database. For most databases, that'll be "read committed". Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
"If you're using SQL Server 2000, on the other hand, this may not be sufficient, since SQL Server 2000 can lock individual records. So, in that case, you'd want to specify a stricter isolation level, such as "serializable". You can do this using the ISOLATION attribute of CFTRANSACTION" Actually, you can only suggest isolation levels to DB, the DB is the one that sets isolation levels and does what it think is the best thing. Also, correct me if I am wrong, but "serializable" is the default setting for cftransaction tag. TK -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 11:44 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK > I have piece of code below: > > > > INSERT INTO tbl_Main (adadadadadadadada) > VALUES (dadadadadadad) > > > SELECT MAX ID from tbl_Main > > > > The question that I have is do I also need to include > with this. I have been told that I should by some > people and not by others. Does CFTRANACTION automatically do > a lock or do you need to specify it. The short answer is, no, you probably don't need to use CFLOCK with this, and you don't need to use CFLOCK with database transactions in general. In general, the only time you need to use CFLOCK is when you have something in your CF code that you don't want multiple people to be able to interact with in specific ways at the same time. The longer answer is that to address these issues, you really have to have a thorough understanding of how databases handle transactions and locking. The whole purpose of CFTRANSACTION is to let you tell the database that a series of queries should be treated as a single transaction. Whenever you talk to the database from CF using CFQUERY or CFSTOREDPROC, you will be conducting one or more transactions with the database. The database will lock records as appropriate during any transaction - locking is central to multi-user functionality within most DBMSs. In the above case, where you're inserting and then fetching the database-generated primary key, you may need to tell the database what kind of transaction you want, however. The default isolation level for most databases is something called "read committed", which will create a transaction that places exclusive locks for the duration of changes, that places shared locks for the duration of reads, and that will honor any existing locks it encounters. If you're using Access, this would be sufficient to ensure that no one else could insert a record until your transaction is complete, since Access would lock the entire table for the duration of the transaction. If you're using SQL Server 2000, on the other hand, this may not be sufficient, since SQL Server 2000 can lock individual records. So, in that case, you'd want to specify a stricter isolation level, such as "serializable". You can do this using the ISOLATION attribute of CFTRANSACTION: ... However, if you're using something like SQL Server, you can avoid this problem by using database-specific functionality, like @@IDENTITY or SCOPE_IDENTITY, which will let you return the identity of the inserted record directly. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: RE: PDF on Fly
Right now Flash Paper comes with Contribute only.
--- Ben
-Original Message-
From: Ciliotta, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 11:03 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: RE: PDF on Fly
Is Flash Paper a separate component or do you need to use a certain
version of Flash or Dream weaver to use it.
Thanks
Mario
-Original Message-
From: Hassan Arteaga Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 10:55 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: RE: PDF on Fly
Thanks Mike...Where can i find Macromedia FlashPaper component?
Macromedia
Site?
Regards
__
MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez
Microsoft Certified System Engineer.
DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo
COPEXTEL, S.A.
_
From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 04:38 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: RE: PDF on Fly
Another suggestion. If you are not 100% locked into PDF's you might
like to
look at Macromedia Flashpaper. It is much quicker to load in a
browser
than PDF files.
Kind Regards - Mike Brunt
Original Message ---
Before you start looking at this, if you have a Windows server that you
can
install software on, look into htmldoc, would be much easier than
this(at
least I think so).
So, take a look here and get the library:
http://www.lowagie.com/iText/docs.html
Here's some sample code in CF utilizing Java and iText, I stripped out a
lot
of code from this or it would have been much longer(needs cleaning as
well),
all this does is put an image into a pdf and saves it:
DEFAULT="#my_path#\mypdf_#createUUID()#.pdf">
username="#app_user#"
password="#app_passwd#">
SELECT *
FROM mytable
pdfFile = createObject("java",
"java.io.FileOutputStream").init(attributes.save_as);
PageSize = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.PageSize").init();
document = createObject("java",
"com.lowagie.text.Document").init(PageSize.A4, 0, 0, 0, 0);
PdfWriter = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.pdf.PdfWriter");
PdfWriter.getInstance(document, pdfFile);
FontFactory = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.FontFactory");
Font = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Font");
BaseFont = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.pdf.BaseFont");
helvetica = BaseFont.createFont("Helvetica", BaseFont.CP1252,
BaseFont.NOT_EMBEDDED);
regular = Font.init(helvetica, 10, Font.NORMAL);
bold = Font.init(helvetica, 10, Font.BOLD);
bbold = Font.init(helvetica, 14, Font.BOLD);
newfont = FontFactory.getFont(FontFactory.HELVETICA, javacast("int",10),
javacast("int",5));
Paragraph = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Paragraph");
Color = createObject("java", "java.awt.Color");
Image = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Image");
Cell = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Cell");
Element = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Element");
document.open();
section1 = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Table").init(2);
section1.setBorderWidth(0);
section1.setBorder(0);
section1.setSpacing(0);
section1.setPadding(0);
section1.setDefaultCellBorder(0);
section1.setWidth(98);
img = Image.getInstance(javacast("string",myimage));
img.setAlignment(2);
newcell1 = Cell.init(img);
newcell1.setColspan(2);
section1.addCell(newcell1);
document.add(section1);
document.close();
-Original Message-
From: Hassan Arteaga Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 5:52 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: PDF on Fly
Thanks Seth!! Colud u send me a little example?
Regards,
__
MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez
Microsoft Certified System Engineer.
DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo
COPEXTEL, S.A.
_
From: Turetsky, Seth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 03:40 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: PDF on Fly
didn't read the article, but i'm using the itext library in java, its
tons
o' fun
-seth
-Original Message-
From: Hassan Arteaga Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 4:35 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: PDF on Fly
I found article in www.sys-con.com about it with the title "PDFs on the
Fly"
But who know another ways?
Regards,
__
MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez
Microsoft Certified System Engineer.
DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo
COPEXTEL, S.A.
_
_
_
_
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
RE: CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
> I have piece of code below: > > > > INSERT INTO tbl_Main (adadadadadadadada) > VALUES (dadadadadadad) > > > SELECT MAX ID from tbl_Main > > > > The question that I have is do I also need to include > with this. I have been told that I should by some > people and not by others. Does CFTRANACTION automatically do > a lock or do you need to specify it. The short answer is, no, you probably don't need to use CFLOCK with this, and you don't need to use CFLOCK with database transactions in general. In general, the only time you need to use CFLOCK is when you have something in your CF code that you don't want multiple people to be able to interact with in specific ways at the same time. The longer answer is that to address these issues, you really have to have a thorough understanding of how databases handle transactions and locking. The whole purpose of CFTRANSACTION is to let you tell the database that a series of queries should be treated as a single transaction. Whenever you talk to the database from CF using CFQUERY or CFSTOREDPROC, you will be conducting one or more transactions with the database. The database will lock records as appropriate during any transaction - locking is central to multi-user functionality within most DBMSs. In the above case, where you're inserting and then fetching the database-generated primary key, you may need to tell the database what kind of transaction you want, however. The default isolation level for most databases is something called "read committed", which will create a transaction that places exclusive locks for the duration of changes, that places shared locks for the duration of reads, and that will honor any existing locks it encounters. If you're using Access, this would be sufficient to ensure that no one else could insert a record until your transaction is complete, since Access would lock the entire table for the duration of the transaction. If you're using SQL Server 2000, on the other hand, this may not be sufficient, since SQL Server 2000 can lock individual records. So, in that case, you'd want to specify a stricter isolation level, such as "serializable". You can do this using the ISOLATION attribute of CFTRANSACTION: ... However, if you're using something like SQL Server, you can avoid this problem by using database-specific functionality, like @@IDENTITY or SCOPE_IDENTITY, which will let you return the identity of the inserted record directly. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: RE: PDF on Fly
> Is Flash Paper a separate component or do you need to use a > certain version of Flash or Dream weaver to use it. FlashPaper comes with Contribute 2, I think, and I don't think there's any way to get it separately. You can use it with Flash 6 or higher, at least, and may be able to use it with older versions, so the users who download FlashPaper content shouldn't have any problems. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: RE: PDF on Fly
Is Flash Paper a separate component or do you need to use a certain version of Flash or Dream weaver to use it.
Thanks
Mario
-Original Message-
From: Hassan Arteaga Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 10:55 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: RE: PDF on Fly
Thanks Mike...Where can i find Macromedia FlashPaper component? Macromedia
Site?
Regards
__
MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez
Microsoft Certified System Engineer.
DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo
COPEXTEL, S.A.
_
From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 04:38 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: RE: PDF on Fly
Another suggestion. If you are not 100% locked into PDF's you might like to
look at Macromedia Flashpaper. It is much quicker to load in a browser
than PDF files.
Kind Regards - Mike Brunt
Original Message ---
Before you start looking at this, if you have a Windows server that you can
install software on, look into htmldoc, would be much easier than this(at
least I think so).
So, take a look here and get the library:
http://www.lowagie.com/iText/docs.html
Here's some sample code in CF utilizing Java and iText, I stripped out a lot
of code from this or it would have been much longer(needs cleaning as well),
all this does is put an image into a pdf and saves it:
DEFAULT="#my_path#\mypdf_#createUUID()#.pdf">
password="#app_passwd#">
SELECT *
FROM mytable
pdfFile = createObject("java",
"java.io.FileOutputStream").init(attributes.save_as);
PageSize = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.PageSize").init();
document = createObject("java",
"com.lowagie.text.Document").init(PageSize.A4, 0, 0, 0, 0);
PdfWriter = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.pdf.PdfWriter");
PdfWriter.getInstance(document, pdfFile);
FontFactory = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.FontFactory");
Font = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Font");
BaseFont = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.pdf.BaseFont");
helvetica = BaseFont.createFont("Helvetica", BaseFont.CP1252,
BaseFont.NOT_EMBEDDED);
regular = Font.init(helvetica, 10, Font.NORMAL);
bold = Font.init(helvetica, 10, Font.BOLD);
bbold = Font.init(helvetica, 14, Font.BOLD);
newfont = FontFactory.getFont(FontFactory.HELVETICA, javacast("int",10),
javacast("int",5));
Paragraph = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Paragraph");
Color = createObject("java", "java.awt.Color");
Image = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Image");
Cell = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Cell");
Element = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Element");
document.open();
section1 = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Table").init(2);
section1.setBorderWidth(0);
section1.setBorder(0);
section1.setSpacing(0);
section1.setPadding(0);
section1.setDefaultCellBorder(0);
section1.setWidth(98);
img = Image.getInstance(javacast("string",myimage));
img.setAlignment(2);
newcell1 = Cell.init(img);
newcell1.setColspan(2);
section1.addCell(newcell1);
document.add(section1);
document.close();
-Original Message-
From: Hassan Arteaga Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 5:52 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: PDF on Fly
Thanks Seth!! Colud u send me a little example?
Regards,
__
MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez
Microsoft Certified System Engineer.
DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo
COPEXTEL, S.A.
_
From: Turetsky, Seth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 03:40 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: PDF on Fly
didn't read the article, but i'm using the itext library in java, its tons
o' fun
-seth
-Original Message-
From: Hassan Arteaga Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 4:35 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: PDF on Fly
I found article in www.sys-con.com about it with the title "PDFs on the Fly"
But who know another ways?
Regards,
__
MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez
Microsoft Certified System Engineer.
DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo
COPEXTEL, S.A.
_
_
_
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
CFTRANSACTION & CFLOCK
Hi All, I have a quick question: I have piece of code below: INSERT INTO tbl_Main (adadadadadadadada) VALUES (dadadadadadad) SELECT MAX ID from tbl_Main The question that I have is do I also need to include with this. I have been told that I should by some people and not by others. Does CFTRANACTION automatically do a lock or do you need to specify it. Thanks and Happy Holidays everyone. Mario [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: RE: PDF on Fly
Thanks Mike...Where can i find Macromedia FlashPaper component? Macromedia
Site?
Regards
__
MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez
Microsoft Certified System Engineer.
DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo
COPEXTEL, S.A.
_
From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 04:38 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: RE: PDF on Fly
Another suggestion. If you are not 100% locked into PDF's you might like to
look at Macromedia Flashpaper. It is much quicker to load in a browser
than PDF files.
Kind Regards - Mike Brunt
Original Message ---
Before you start looking at this, if you have a Windows server that you can
install software on, look into htmldoc, would be much easier than this(at
least I think so).
So, take a look here and get the library:
http://www.lowagie.com/iText/docs.html
Here's some sample code in CF utilizing Java and iText, I stripped out a lot
of code from this or it would have been much longer(needs cleaning as well),
all this does is put an image into a pdf and saves it:
DEFAULT="#my_path#\mypdf_#createUUID()#.pdf">
password="#app_passwd#">
SELECT *
FROM mytable
pdfFile = createObject("java",
"java.io.FileOutputStream").init(attributes.save_as);
PageSize = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.PageSize").init();
document = createObject("java",
"com.lowagie.text.Document").init(PageSize.A4, 0, 0, 0, 0);
PdfWriter = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.pdf.PdfWriter");
PdfWriter.getInstance(document, pdfFile);
FontFactory = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.FontFactory");
Font = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Font");
BaseFont = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.pdf.BaseFont");
helvetica = BaseFont.createFont("Helvetica", BaseFont.CP1252,
BaseFont.NOT_EMBEDDED);
regular = Font.init(helvetica, 10, Font.NORMAL);
bold = Font.init(helvetica, 10, Font.BOLD);
bbold = Font.init(helvetica, 14, Font.BOLD);
newfont = FontFactory.getFont(FontFactory.HELVETICA, javacast("int",10),
javacast("int",5));
Paragraph = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Paragraph");
Color = createObject("java", "java.awt.Color");
Image = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Image");
Cell = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Cell");
Element = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Element");
document.open();
section1 = createObject("java", "com.lowagie.text.Table").init(2);
section1.setBorderWidth(0);
section1.setBorder(0);
section1.setSpacing(0);
section1.setPadding(0);
section1.setDefaultCellBorder(0);
section1.setWidth(98);
img = Image.getInstance(javacast("string",myimage));
img.setAlignment(2);
newcell1 = Cell.init(img);
newcell1.setColspan(2);
section1.addCell(newcell1);
document.add(section1);
document.close();
-Original Message-
From: Hassan Arteaga Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 5:52 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: PDF on Fly
Thanks Seth!! Colud u send me a little example?
Regards,
__
MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez
Microsoft Certified System Engineer.
DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo
COPEXTEL, S.A.
_
From: Turetsky, Seth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 03:40 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: PDF on Fly
didn't read the article, but i'm using the itext library in java, its tons
o' fun
-seth
-Original Message-
From: Hassan Arteaga Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 4:35 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: PDF on Fly
I found article in www.sys-con.com about it with the title "PDFs on the Fly"
But who know another ways?
Regards,
__
MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez
Microsoft Certified System Engineer.
DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo
COPEXTEL, S.A.
_
_
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
RE: OT - MySQL - MyISAM or InnoDB
If you need transactions, use InnoDB. -Original Message- From: Spectrum WebDesign [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: December 24, 2003 4:56 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: OT - MySQL - MyISAM or InnoDB After using MS SQL Server for years today we're using MySQL for a CF website project. What's the best table type for that project: InnoDB(transaction MySQL table) or MyISAM(no transaction)? Why? Thanks -- ___ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT: online credit card processing and merchant accounts
What kind of percentage rates did you get from payquake? Dan -Original Message- From: Rick Root [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 5:23 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: OT: online credit card processing and merchant accounts I used payquake (www.payquake.com) to set up my merchant account and do payments through authorize.net They've got a good range of programs depending on your needs. - Rick _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT - MySQL - MyISAM or InnoDB
I use InnoDB because it supports foreign keys and that is a huge help when you don't have one of the other major DB's available! HTH Donnie Bachan Phone: (718) 217-2883 ICQ#: 28006783 "Nitendo Vinces - By Striving You Shall Conquer" [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
OT - MySQL - MyISAM or InnoDB
After using MS SQL Server for years today we're using MySQL for a CF website project. What's the best table type for that project: InnoDB(transaction MySQL table) or MyISAM(no transaction)? Why? Thanks -- ___ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
