RE: Faster SMTP
I've used Mdaemon in the past. Very fast mail processing. Not 100% sure, but I think they even do a single domain free version, you could use it as a mail spool, perhaps? I also run Smartermail because my customer like the web access to mail, bit it is SO slow on processing lists (also not Enterprise version). I've never used the Windows SMTP service for this, anyone know if it runs multiple threads and how configurable it is? -Original Message- From: webmas...@pegweb.com [mailto:webmas...@pegweb.com] Sent: 11 December 2009 01:38 To: cf-talk Subject: RE: Faster SMTP Yeah I'm using smarter mail for my mail server on a separate server. I have clients where some of them have around 30k email lists. So when you get one of those that goes out it takes the CF server several hours to spool it out since it is pro and not enterprise. So any other email sent by CF gets put in line behind that. -Original Message- From: Justin Scott [mailto:jscott-li...@gravityfree.com] Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 11:36 AM To: cf-talk Subject: RE: Faster SMTP How many messages are we talking about? I've generally found that writing MSG files directly to the pickup folder of the Microsoft SMTP service (bundled with IIS) gets them out WAY faster than anything else I've tried. This, of course, assumes you're on Windows and have access to configure the server. The component you linked to has some nice features that will handle some of the more complex tasks of creating the message file (multi-mime, etc.). Overall it doesn't look too bad if you need those features. -Justin Scott ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329077 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Faster SMTP
Yeah I'm using smarter mail for my mail server on a separate server. I have clients where some of them have around 30k email lists. So when you get one of those that goes out it takes the CF server several hours to spool it out since it is pro and not enterprise. So any other email sent by CF gets put in line behind that. -Original Message- From: Justin Scott [mailto:jscott-li...@gravityfree.com] Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 11:36 AM To: cf-talk Subject: RE: Faster SMTP How many messages are we talking about? I've generally found that writing MSG files directly to the pickup folder of the Microsoft SMTP service (bundled with IIS) gets them out WAY faster than anything else I've tried. This, of course, assumes you're on Windows and have access to configure the server. The component you linked to has some nice features that will handle some of the more complex tasks of creating the message file (multi-mime, etc.). Overall it doesn't look too bad if you need those features. -Justin Scott ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329076 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: scoping and speed
Actually I think that was my bad. I had mentioned that I heard #foo# evaluates faster than #variables.foo# on Railo. Guess I heard (or remembered) incorrectly :) Sorry 'bout that. On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Gert Franz wrote: > > Judah, > > you got me wrong. For Railo there is no difference if searching > #variables.foo# instead of #foo#. It is only a difference for Adobe CF. > Here ACF checks whether there is a struct called variables in the variables > scope and if not it will check the variables scope. If you only have "foo" > it will check the variables scope instantly since there is no "." in the > variable addressing and hence it's faster. In Railo variables.foo is > identical to foo. > This is one reason why we do not support dots in variable names like ACF if > you use something like this: > > #susi.peter# <--- this works in ACF but not in Railo. > Railo throws an error saying that there is no key named peter in the struct > susi. ACF assumes first the same and in case of an error it checks the > variables scope for a variable with the key "susi.peter". In Railo you have > to write: > #variables["susi.peter"]# > Since we do not allow the first notation, when you have something like > "variables.foo" Railo knows that it will check the variables scope at > compile time. ACF does not! > > Hope that clarifies things a little. > > Greetings from Switzerland > Gert Franz > > Railo Technologies Professional Open Source > skype: gert.franz g...@getrailo.com > +41 76 5680 231 www.getrailo.com > > > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: Judah McAuley [mailto:ju...@wiredotter.com] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 10. Dezember 2009 20:16 > An: cf-talk > Betreff: Re: scoping and speed > > > Out of curiosity Gert, why would Railo be slower finding > #variables.foo# than finding #foo# if variable cascading is on? Is it > checking for the existence of a struct named variables before checking > the actual scope or something? > > Judah > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 8:40 AM, Gert Franz wrote: > > > > Yes... that's true. If you even scope the variables from the variables > scope > > (EXCEPT in components, since they have their own variables scope) CF is > > around 4 times slower than addressing a variable from there without the > > prefix "variables". But this execution isn't very significant when your > > website is quite slow. It is 4 times faster not to scope variables from > the > > variables scope, but in reality you won't notice that much improvement > since > > accessing variables in comparison to querying a database is really a > matter > > of order of magnitudes (So maybe "variables.whatever" executes in 12 nano > > seconds, where as "whatever" executes in 3 nano seconds, whereas a query > > will take 1ms which is 1000 nano seconds). > > > > In Railo you can enable a setting that actually forces you to scope your > > variables from the various scopes. So for instance if you do something > like > > this: > > #id# > > and ID is in the URL scope Railo will complain that it doesn't know the > > variable ID (if this setting is turned on) and throw an error. So you > HAVE > > TO write it like this: > > #url.id# > > Then Railo processes the page without error. > > Once you have scoped all your variables the system will be somewhat > faster. > > > > Just imagine it like this: > > You are searching for a Peter (a variable) in a school (CF memory). You > > enter every classroom (scope) and check whether a pupil named "Peter" is > > sitting in it. If you find it, thats your variable. But if you know that > > Peter is sitting in the classroom number 55 then you go directly there > and > > look for Peter. With the scope cascading disabled, Railo will not allow > you > > to look for a "Peter" in the school without the classroom number. > > > > Hope that helps a little. > > > > Greetings from Switzerland > > Gert Fran > > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329075 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
CF5 Site-wide Error Handler
I have a site-wide error handler setup for a CF 5 server. I also have one setup for an MX7 server. The MX7 server will still display the standard debug information even if the site-wide error handler is triggered. The CF 5 server will not. Is this a limitation with CF 5 or am I missing a setting? Thanks, Donnie ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329074 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
AW: scoping and speed
Judah, you got me wrong. For Railo there is no difference if searching #variables.foo# instead of #foo#. It is only a difference for Adobe CF. Here ACF checks whether there is a struct called variables in the variables scope and if not it will check the variables scope. If you only have "foo" it will check the variables scope instantly since there is no "." in the variable addressing and hence it's faster. In Railo variables.foo is identical to foo. This is one reason why we do not support dots in variable names like ACF if you use something like this: #susi.peter# <--- this works in ACF but not in Railo. Railo throws an error saying that there is no key named peter in the struct susi. ACF assumes first the same and in case of an error it checks the variables scope for a variable with the key "susi.peter". In Railo you have to write: #variables["susi.peter"]# Since we do not allow the first notation, when you have something like "variables.foo" Railo knows that it will check the variables scope at compile time. ACF does not! Hope that clarifies things a little. Greetings from Switzerland Gert Franz Railo Technologies Professional Open Source skype: gert.franz g...@getrailo.com +41 76 5680 231 www.getrailo.com -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Judah McAuley [mailto:ju...@wiredotter.com] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 10. Dezember 2009 20:16 An: cf-talk Betreff: Re: scoping and speed Out of curiosity Gert, why would Railo be slower finding #variables.foo# than finding #foo# if variable cascading is on? Is it checking for the existence of a struct named variables before checking the actual scope or something? Judah On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 8:40 AM, Gert Franz wrote: > > Yes... that's true. If you even scope the variables from the variables scope > (EXCEPT in components, since they have their own variables scope) CF is > around 4 times slower than addressing a variable from there without the > prefix "variables". But this execution isn't very significant when your > website is quite slow. It is 4 times faster not to scope variables from the > variables scope, but in reality you won't notice that much improvement since > accessing variables in comparison to querying a database is really a matter > of order of magnitudes (So maybe "variables.whatever" executes in 12 nano > seconds, where as "whatever" executes in 3 nano seconds, whereas a query > will take 1ms which is 1000 nano seconds). > > In Railo you can enable a setting that actually forces you to scope your > variables from the various scopes. So for instance if you do something like > this: > #id# > and ID is in the URL scope Railo will complain that it doesn't know the > variable ID (if this setting is turned on) and throw an error. So you HAVE > TO write it like this: > #url.id# > Then Railo processes the page without error. > Once you have scoped all your variables the system will be somewhat faster. > > Just imagine it like this: > You are searching for a Peter (a variable) in a school (CF memory). You > enter every classroom (scope) and check whether a pupil named "Peter" is > sitting in it. If you find it, thats your variable. But if you know that > Peter is sitting in the classroom number 55 then you go directly there and > look for Peter. With the scope cascading disabled, Railo will not allow you > to look for a "Peter" in the school without the classroom number. > > Hope that helps a little. > > Greetings from Switzerland > Gert Fran ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329073 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: scoping and speed
According to Adobe, Yes. http://www.adobe.com/devnet/coldfusion/articles/coldfusion_performance_04.html Thanks, Eric Cobb http://www.cfgears.com Chad Gray wrote: > If you don't scope your local variables does the page run slower? > > IE. #variables.foo# vs. #foo# > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329072 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: scoping and speed
Out of curiosity Gert, why would Railo be slower finding #variables.foo# than finding #foo# if variable cascading is on? Is it checking for the existence of a struct named variables before checking the actual scope or something? Judah On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 8:40 AM, Gert Franz wrote: > > Yes... that's true. If you even scope the variables from the variables scope > (EXCEPT in components, since they have their own variables scope) CF is > around 4 times slower than addressing a variable from there without the > prefix "variables". But this execution isn't very significant when your > website is quite slow. It is 4 times faster not to scope variables from the > variables scope, but in reality you won't notice that much improvement since > accessing variables in comparison to querying a database is really a matter > of order of magnitudes (So maybe "variables.whatever" executes in 12 nano > seconds, where as "whatever" executes in 3 nano seconds, whereas a query > will take 1ms which is 1000 nano seconds). > > In Railo you can enable a setting that actually forces you to scope your > variables from the various scopes. So for instance if you do something like > this: > #id# > and ID is in the URL scope Railo will complain that it doesn't know the > variable ID (if this setting is turned on) and throw an error. So you HAVE > TO write it like this: > #url.id# > Then Railo processes the page without error. > Once you have scoped all your variables the system will be somewhat faster. > > Just imagine it like this: > You are searching for a Peter (a variable) in a school (CF memory). You > enter every classroom (scope) and check whether a pupil named "Peter" is > sitting in it. If you find it, thats your variable. But if you know that > Peter is sitting in the classroom number 55 then you go directly there and > look for Peter. With the scope cascading disabled, Railo will not allow you > to look for a "Peter" in the school without the classroom number. > > Hope that helps a little. > > Greetings from Switzerland > Gert Fran ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329071 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Long Running Processes in ColdFusion
My .02... If what is happening is being done on the database backend anyway, then do the heavy lifting in the DB. That's what they are there for. You could have CF kick something off on the DB that does something like schedule a procedure to kick off in 30 seconds, then return a status code for the successful scheduling. Do this while passing in the appropriate data with one extra item, a unique identifier. That unique identifier could be stored in a table say with an email address of where the data is to go and a null field for date completed. Also store the results of each run somewhere with that id. Then have CF check the table every minute; all of the ids that have completion dates get their data pulled and emailed out. Then the lines for those ids get deleted. This puts all of the database processing where it belongs in the database. Steve -Original Message- From: Wil Genovese [mailto:jugg...@visi.com] Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 1:35 PM To: cf-talk Subject: Re: Long Running Processes in ColdFusion John, That's the same thing I told them In theory there just aren't enough minutes in the day. IF we do this it will be separate dedicated powerful servers that connect to our massive DB cluster. My question is not HOW to do this. I know how. We have the money to buy the servers. My argument is this is not the best way to do it. I'm looking for more of arguments along the lines of has ColdFusion improved enough to be considered as a viable tool to execute long running processes on the back end? Thank you, Wil Genovese Sr. Web Application Developer http://www.trunkful.com On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:06 PM, John M Bliss wrote: > > My 2 cents: in theory, CF should be able to handle what you're > describing...IF AND ONLY IF you have some important "stuff" in place...in > (approximate) order of importance: > > 1. powerful & healthy DB and DB server (or cluster) > 2. powerful & healthy CF server(s) (with max RequestTimeout adjusted > properly) > 1. different machine(s) from DB server > 2. ideally, these CF server(s) would be dedicated to this process in > order to create a "hard" boundary between it and other CF > servers/processes > 1. 280 x 30 min = 8400 min / 1440 min/day = ideally, you'd have 6 > servers dedicated to this process > > I know that seems like a lot but, in my experience, that's the closest you > can come to a guarantee that the process in question will successfully run > 280 times/day and not mess with your other CF servers/processes. There're > (probably) other ways to do it (virtualization? sandboxing? etc)...and > maybe other cf-talkers can talk about those...? > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Wil Genovese wrote: > > > > > I have a question for best practice/usage of CF Server. > > > > I've been programming CFML for the past 10 years or so and have done lots > > of > > massive tasks with CF. It has always been my understanding that CF was > > better suited to fast running processes. Ie. something that runs in a > > matter > > of seconds (worse case) and in fractions of a seconds (best case). Where > I > > work we spend a lot of time performance tuning our CF servers, DB severs > > and > > code to run as fast as possible so we keep our average request time near > > 300ms while chugging out 15-20 Req/Second/Server. > > > > Recently I was asked to assist to programming a process that would be run > > on > > a scheduled basis and it is expected to take 30 minutes or longer to run > > per > > run. It is expected to run at least 280 or more times per day. I'm doing > > my > > best to tell the bosses that this is not a good idea. That in reality it > > should be run as a back end process. The quick gist of this is we are > > re-coding the processes that takes peoples saved search criteria and > sends > > them daily emails based upon the results that ran against a new set of > > data. We do this now in a back end process that takes many many hours to > > run. > > > > So my question is this. Am I right to be concerned about intentionally > > creating a process that takes at least 30 minutes to run and it does so > > many > > times a day? Or has ColdFusion changed enough to not have to be concerned > > about this? > > > > Thank you, > > > > Wil Genovese > > Sr. Web Application Developer > > http://www.trunkful.com > > > > > > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329070 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Long Running Processes in ColdFusion
As long as you're aware of all of the caveats/gotchas/etc (especially SEE Brad's post), sure. On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Wil Genovese wrote: > > John, > > That's the same thing I told them In theory there just aren't enough > minutes > in the day. IF we do this it will be separate dedicated powerful servers > that connect to our massive DB cluster. > > My question is not HOW to do this. I know how. We have the money to buy > the > servers. My argument is this is not the best way to do it. > > I'm looking for more of arguments along the lines of has ColdFusion > improved > enough to be considered as a viable tool to execute long running processes > on the back end? > > Thank you, > > Wil Genovese > Sr. Web Application Developer > http://www.trunkful.com > > > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:06 PM, John M Bliss > wrote: > > > > > My 2 cents: in theory, CF should be able to handle what you're > > describing...IF AND ONLY IF you have some important "stuff" in place...in > > (approximate) order of importance: > > > > 1. powerful & healthy DB and DB server (or cluster) > > 2. powerful & healthy CF server(s) (with max RequestTimeout adjusted > > properly) > > 1. different machine(s) from DB server > > 2. ideally, these CF server(s) would be dedicated to this process in > > order to create a "hard" boundary between it and other CF > > servers/processes > > 1. 280 x 30 min = 8400 min / 1440 min/day = ideally, you'd have 6 > > servers dedicated to this process > > > > I know that seems like a lot but, in my experience, that's the closest > you > > can come to a guarantee that the process in question will successfully > run > > 280 times/day and not mess with your other CF servers/processes. > There're > > (probably) other ways to do it (virtualization? sandboxing? etc)...and > > maybe other cf-talkers can talk about those...? > > > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Wil Genovese wrote: > > > > > > > > I have a question for best practice/usage of CF Server. > > > > > > I've been programming CFML for the past 10 years or so and have done > lots > > > of > > > massive tasks with CF. It has always been my understanding that CF was > > > better suited to fast running processes. Ie. something that runs in a > > > matter > > > of seconds (worse case) and in fractions of a seconds (best case). > Where > > I > > > work we spend a lot of time performance tuning our CF servers, DB > severs > > > and > > > code to run as fast as possible so we keep our average request time > near > > > 300ms while chugging out 15-20 Req/Second/Server. > > > > > > Recently I was asked to assist to programming a process that would be > run > > > on > > > a scheduled basis and it is expected to take 30 minutes or longer to > run > > > per > > > run. It is expected to run at least 280 or more times per day. I'm > doing > > > my > > > best to tell the bosses that this is not a good idea. That in reality > it > > > should be run as a back end process. The quick gist of this is we are > > > re-coding the processes that takes peoples saved search criteria and > > sends > > > them daily emails based upon the results that ran against a new set of > > > data. We do this now in a back end process that takes many many hours > to > > > run. > > > > > > So my question is this. Am I right to be concerned about intentionally > > > creating a process that takes at least 30 minutes to run and it does so > > > many > > > times a day? Or has ColdFusion changed enough to not have to be > concerned > > > about this? > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > > > Wil Genovese > > > Sr. Web Application Developer > > > http://www.trunkful.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329069 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Long Running Processes in ColdFusion
Great rundown Brad -mk -Original Message- From: b...@bradwood.com [mailto:b...@bradwood.com] "It has always been my understanding that CF was better suited to fast running processes." In general, fast request times are desired when they are a response to a web request. Nobody is sitting in front of a keyboard waiting for your long running job to complete so there's really nothing wrong with the fact that is will run for a long time. I've run scheduled tasks that took hours on ColdFusion and it worked fine. If you have a dedicated ColdFusion server processing this job, I say do it. If you want this process to run on your main ColdFusion server that is also serving your web content, you have a few questions to ask yourself. At face value a long running process can have the following affects on the server: 1) It uses a thread. You only have so many of these available. If no more than 1 of these long running processes are gong at the same time, it will only be taking 1 thread at any given time away from the rest of the server. 2) It can take CPU usage from your CF server. This is largely dependent on WHAT the process is doing. Is most of the process CFML code execution? If so, it will probably take a lot of CPU load and will slow down the other threads. If 99% of the process is waiting on some huge database query to run, then I would say that thread will have a very minimal impact on the other requests. 3) It can cause locks on CF/Web resources. This depends on what the code does. There could be CFLOCKs your app may have which would affect other requests. If you are running ColdFusion Standard, there are semaphore locks for things like PDF generation and SMS gateways because they are single-threaded unless you have ColdFusion Enterprise. A process that reads or writes a large number of files may also bog down disk activity for the server. Memory consumption may also be an issue. Once again, this all depends on what your process is doing. 4) It can cause locks on DB resources. If this process spends a lot time hitting the database, it can cause a lot locks and disk I/O based on what it is doing. If it is reading only, this would be a very good place for a replicated DB server. So I guess my answer is a big fat "it depends". I would say there are long-running jobs that would be perfectly safe to have on a box also serving a web site. That being said, I would personally feel much safer having it run on a dedicated server. ~Brad ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329068 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Long Running Processes in ColdFusion
John, That's the same thing I told them In theory there just aren't enough minutes in the day. IF we do this it will be separate dedicated powerful servers that connect to our massive DB cluster. My question is not HOW to do this. I know how. We have the money to buy the servers. My argument is this is not the best way to do it. I'm looking for more of arguments along the lines of has ColdFusion improved enough to be considered as a viable tool to execute long running processes on the back end? Thank you, Wil Genovese Sr. Web Application Developer http://www.trunkful.com On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:06 PM, John M Bliss wrote: > > My 2 cents: in theory, CF should be able to handle what you're > describing...IF AND ONLY IF you have some important "stuff" in place...in > (approximate) order of importance: > > 1. powerful & healthy DB and DB server (or cluster) > 2. powerful & healthy CF server(s) (with max RequestTimeout adjusted > properly) > 1. different machine(s) from DB server > 2. ideally, these CF server(s) would be dedicated to this process in > order to create a "hard" boundary between it and other CF > servers/processes > 1. 280 x 30 min = 8400 min / 1440 min/day = ideally, you'd have 6 > servers dedicated to this process > > I know that seems like a lot but, in my experience, that's the closest you > can come to a guarantee that the process in question will successfully run > 280 times/day and not mess with your other CF servers/processes. There're > (probably) other ways to do it (virtualization? sandboxing? etc)...and > maybe other cf-talkers can talk about those...? > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Wil Genovese wrote: > > > > > I have a question for best practice/usage of CF Server. > > > > I've been programming CFML for the past 10 years or so and have done lots > > of > > massive tasks with CF. It has always been my understanding that CF was > > better suited to fast running processes. Ie. something that runs in a > > matter > > of seconds (worse case) and in fractions of a seconds (best case). Where > I > > work we spend a lot of time performance tuning our CF servers, DB severs > > and > > code to run as fast as possible so we keep our average request time near > > 300ms while chugging out 15-20 Req/Second/Server. > > > > Recently I was asked to assist to programming a process that would be run > > on > > a scheduled basis and it is expected to take 30 minutes or longer to run > > per > > run. It is expected to run at least 280 or more times per day. I'm doing > > my > > best to tell the bosses that this is not a good idea. That in reality it > > should be run as a back end process. The quick gist of this is we are > > re-coding the processes that takes peoples saved search criteria and > sends > > them daily emails based upon the results that ran against a new set of > > data. We do this now in a back end process that takes many many hours to > > run. > > > > So my question is this. Am I right to be concerned about intentionally > > creating a process that takes at least 30 minutes to run and it does so > > many > > times a day? Or has ColdFusion changed enough to not have to be concerned > > about this? > > > > Thank you, > > > > Wil Genovese > > Sr. Web Application Developer > > http://www.trunkful.com > > > > > > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329067 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Long Running Processes in ColdFusion
"It has always been my understanding that CF was better suited to fast running processes." In general, fast request times are desired when they are a response to a web request. Nobody is sitting in front of a keyboard waiting for your long running job to complete so there's really nothing wrong with the fact that is will run for a long time. I've run scheduled tasks that took hours on ColdFusion and it worked fine. If you have a dedicated ColdFusion server processing this job, I say do it. If you want this process to run on your main ColdFusion server that is also serving your web content, you have a few questions to ask yourself. At face value a long running process can have the following affects on the server: 1) It uses a thread. You only have so many of these available. If no more than 1 of these long running processes are gong at the same time, it will only be taking 1 thread at any given time away from the rest of the server. 2) It can take CPU usage from your CF server. This is largely dependent on WHAT the process is doing. Is most of the process CFML code execution? If so, it will probably take a lot of CPU load and will slow down the other threads. If 99% of the process is waiting on some huge database query to run, then I would say that thread will have a very minimal impact on the other requests. 3) It can cause locks on CF/Web resources. This depends on what the code does. There could be CFLOCKs your app may have which would affect other requests. If you are running ColdFusion Standard, there are semaphore locks for things like PDF generation and SMS gateways because they are single-threaded unless you have ColdFusion Enterprise. A process that reads or writes a large number of files may also bog down disk activity for the server. Memory consumption may also be an issue. Once again, this all depends on what your process is doing. 4) It can cause locks on DB resources. If this process spends a lot time hitting the database, it can cause a lot locks and disk I/O based on what it is doing. If it is reading only, this would be a very good place for a replicated DB server. So I guess my answer is a big fat "it depends". I would say there are long-running jobs that would be perfectly safe to have on a box also serving a web site. That being said, I would personally feel much safer having it run on a dedicated server. ~Brad ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329066 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: [OT] Populating a MySQL Database from Active Directory
> Hi there guys. I am creating a app like this that I really need the code for. > I cant find it anywhere (spend about 7 hours the past > week looking). I am creating an application to manage active directory from > an asp.net website but have no more windows servers > so am running off linux (hence the mySQL). I need the AD database to > replicate to the mySQL database where the values can be > manipulated via the web UI. AD is not a relational database, so I don't think you'll be able to do this. You could set up an LDAP server on Linux, which would be roughly equivalent. But frankly, if you want to work with AD, you need AD. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information! ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329065 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: [OT] Populating a MySQL Database from Active Directory
Hi there guys. I am creating a app like this that I really need the code for. I cant find it anywhere (spend about 7 hours the past week looking). I am creating an application to manage active directory from an asp.net website but have no more windows servers so am running off linux (hence the mySQL). I need the AD database to replicate to the mySQL database where the values can be manipulated via the web UI. Thanks, I could really do with this. Bye Lawrence lawrence_...@yahoo.co.uk ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329064 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Long Running Processes in ColdFusion
My 2 cents: in theory, CF should be able to handle what you're describing...IF AND ONLY IF you have some important "stuff" in place...in (approximate) order of importance: 1. powerful & healthy DB and DB server (or cluster) 2. powerful & healthy CF server(s) (with max RequestTimeout adjusted properly) 1. different machine(s) from DB server 2. ideally, these CF server(s) would be dedicated to this process in order to create a "hard" boundary between it and other CF servers/processes 1. 280 x 30 min = 8400 min / 1440 min/day = ideally, you'd have 6 servers dedicated to this process I know that seems like a lot but, in my experience, that's the closest you can come to a guarantee that the process in question will successfully run 280 times/day and not mess with your other CF servers/processes. There're (probably) other ways to do it (virtualization? sandboxing? etc)...and maybe other cf-talkers can talk about those...? On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Wil Genovese wrote: > > I have a question for best practice/usage of CF Server. > > I've been programming CFML for the past 10 years or so and have done lots > of > massive tasks with CF. It has always been my understanding that CF was > better suited to fast running processes. Ie. something that runs in a > matter > of seconds (worse case) and in fractions of a seconds (best case). Where I > work we spend a lot of time performance tuning our CF servers, DB severs > and > code to run as fast as possible so we keep our average request time near > 300ms while chugging out 15-20 Req/Second/Server. > > Recently I was asked to assist to programming a process that would be run > on > a scheduled basis and it is expected to take 30 minutes or longer to run > per > run. It is expected to run at least 280 or more times per day. I'm doing > my > best to tell the bosses that this is not a good idea. That in reality it > should be run as a back end process. The quick gist of this is we are > re-coding the processes that takes peoples saved search criteria and sends > them daily emails based upon the results that ran against a new set of > data. We do this now in a back end process that takes many many hours to > run. > > So my question is this. Am I right to be concerned about intentionally > creating a process that takes at least 30 minutes to run and it does so > many > times a day? Or has ColdFusion changed enough to not have to be concerned > about this? > > Thank you, > > Wil Genovese > Sr. Web Application Developer > http://www.trunkful.com > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329063 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: AW: scoping and speed
Thanks for that info about Railo, Gert. That setting is exactly what I wished I had in Adobe CF the other day. :) ~Brad Original Message Subject: AW: scoping and speed From: "Gert Franz" Date: Thu, December 10, 2009 10:40 am To: cf-talk In Railo you can enable a setting that actually forces you to scope your variables from the various scopes. ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329062 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Long Running Processes in ColdFusion
I have a question for best practice/usage of CF Server. I've been programming CFML for the past 10 years or so and have done lots of massive tasks with CF. It has always been my understanding that CF was better suited to fast running processes. Ie. something that runs in a matter of seconds (worse case) and in fractions of a seconds (best case). Where I work we spend a lot of time performance tuning our CF servers, DB severs and code to run as fast as possible so we keep our average request time near 300ms while chugging out 15-20 Req/Second/Server. Recently I was asked to assist to programming a process that would be run on a scheduled basis and it is expected to take 30 minutes or longer to run per run. It is expected to run at least 280 or more times per day. I'm doing my best to tell the bosses that this is not a good idea. That in reality it should be run as a back end process. The quick gist of this is we are re-coding the processes that takes peoples saved search criteria and sends them daily emails based upon the results that ran against a new set of data. We do this now in a back end process that takes many many hours to run. So my question is this. Am I right to be concerned about intentionally creating a process that takes at least 30 minutes to run and it does so many times a day? Or has ColdFusion changed enough to not have to be concerned about this? Thank you, Wil Genovese Sr. Web Application Developer http://www.trunkful.com ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329061 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
re: convert this cfscript back to tag?
~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329060 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Load-balancing servers
Have had good luck with hardware load balancing from Coyote Point. We used client vars so that sessions weren't lost even when users were moved across 4-5 servers, but cookies should provide you the same behavior. Works especially well if you've got your uploaded files in a single shared resource accessed over UNC, as you've outlined. ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329059 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Load-balancing servers
Thank you! This is very helpful! Rick -Original Message- From: WebSite CFTalk [mailto:cft...@website.no] Sent: December-10-09 11:53 AM To: cf-talk Subject: RE: Load-balancing servers Maybe something like: - Hardware load balancer in front of web/app servers, or NLB load balancing between web/app servers (Windows) - Instead of UNC path to shared folders synchronize web folders/content folders using DFS Replication (Windows 2003 R2 - Windows 2008) - If windows 2008, IIS 7.5 with shared config. Clustering CF is covered many places, this one is good and thorough: http://www.bpurcell.org/viewContent.cfm?ContentID=121 -Helge -Original Message- From: Rick Sanders [mailto:r...@webenergy.ca] Sent: 10. desember 2009 15:59 To: cf-talk Subject: Load-balancing servers I have 2 Cold Fusion Enterprise servers. What I would like to do is balance the load between 2 machines, and maybe more in the future. I have a very large and demanding portal app that is going live soon. I've looked over the documentation and it doesn't seem to cover much about it. Can anyone offer some insight on this? I know I'll have to change any absolute paths to UNC paths and set up any ODBC databases, but is there anything else from the app side I need to do? Thanks! Rick Sanders Webenergy Canada: 902-431-7279 USA: 919-799-9076 Canada: www.webenergy.ca USA: www.webenergyusa.com ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329057 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Load-balancing servers
Like several other people mentioned, you need to decide if you are going to be using sticky sessions where a user gets sent back to the same server over and over. If you are going to do that, you won't need to worry about session replication, temp directories, or any of that stuff except for in the event of a total server failure where he load balancer starts shoving people over to another server. There are many, many options for you though as whether or not you are going to use JRun clustering etc. We use a barracuda hardware load balancer, with round robin and sticky sessions. That works pretty seamless. The only real gotcha is if you are using SSL, make sure you get a HW load balancer that supports SSL termination. A lot of people's IP addresses change when they switch from HTTP to HTTPS and a level 4 load balancer that can't introspect those requests won't recognize them and they will switch servers on you resulting in their session being lost. At one time I really really wanted to use session replication (which is usually done with JRUN clustering behind a single web server with no hardware firewall) but I was very disappointed when I found out that is has a healthy overhead that grows the more servers you have transferring all those sessions around, and it took Adobe freaking _FOREVER_ to actually make object serialization (with arrays and result sets) to work correctly. Anyway, read some of the links people put up and try to decide what direction you want to move. You kind of need to weigh the cost and complexity of your setup with how demanding your site actually is and how much load you need to have. If you plan on reaching the daily traffic of MySpace, I would recommend looking into Amazon EC2. :) By the way, no sticky sessions there :( ~Brad Original Message Subject: Load-balancing servers From: "Rick Sanders" Date: Thu, December 10, 2009 8:59 am To: cf-talk I have 2 Cold Fusion Enterprise servers. What I would like to do is balance the load between 2 machines, and maybe more in the future. I have a very large and demanding portal app that is going live soon. I've looked over the documentation and it doesn't seem to cover much about it. Can anyone offer some insight on this? ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329055 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Load-balancing servers
Hi Mark, I only use cookies for client sessions. I've had too many issues with people stealing sessions. As for files, I keep the files on one server and will just convert the absolute paths to unc paths. I'm running full 1gb on the internal network and the servers are brand-new so I don't forsee an issue with speed or bandwidth. The only thing the cf server does is serve the website. Database, email, and load-balancing servers are all separate machines. Rick -Original Message- From: Mark Kruger [mailto:mkru...@cfwebtools.com] Sent: December-10-09 12:05 PM To: cf-talk Subject: RE: Load-balancing servers Rick, The questions to ask are - what are you doing with session variabls and client variables, and .. What are the capabilities of your chosen load balancing method. Remember that the potential here is for a user to bounce back and forth between your servers while surfing your site - so you have to be able to imagine the impact of that on the user. Will he lose his session? Will that matter? Etc. If you are using a hardware load balancer they typically come with choices to help mitigate these issues (like sticky sessions for example). As for files - you have to be able to either sync files between the servers or use a shared file storage - and there are trade offs to each of these approaches. -mark Mark A. Kruger, CFG, MCSE (402) 408-3733 ext 105 www.cfwebtools.com www.coldfusionmuse.com www.necfug.com -Original Message- From: Rick Sanders [mailto:r...@webenergy.ca] Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 8:59 AM To: cf-talk Subject: Load-balancing servers I have 2 Cold Fusion Enterprise servers. What I would like to do is balance the load between 2 machines, and maybe more in the future. I have a very large and demanding portal app that is going live soon. I've looked over the documentation and it doesn't seem to cover much about it. Can anyone offer some insight on this? I know I'll have to change any absolute paths to UNC paths and set up any ODBC databases, but is there anything else from the app side I need to do? Thanks! Rick Sanders Webenergy Canada: 902-431-7279 USA: 919-799-9076 Canada: www.webenergy.ca USA: www.webenergyusa.com ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329058 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Load-balancing servers
Thanks Shannon but I'm running on Windows Server. Rick -Original Message- From: Shannon Peevey [mailto:spee...@stolaf.edu] Sent: December-10-09 12:26 PM To: cf-talk Subject: Re: Load-balancing servers Here is a couple of Clustering FAQs that I wrote back in 2007, which may have some points of interest for you: http://speeves.erikin.com/2007/02/how-to-setup-apache-2-with-coldfusion-7.ht ml http://speeves.erikin.com/2007/01/coldfusion-clustering-faq.html speeves On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 9:52 AM, WebSite CFTalk wrote: > > Maybe something like: > > - Hardware load balancer in front of web/app servers, or NLB load balancing > between web/app servers (Windows) > - Instead of UNC path to shared folders synchronize web folders/content > folders using DFS Replication (Windows 2003 R2 - Windows 2008) > - If windows 2008, IIS 7.5 with shared config. > > Clustering CF is covered many places, this one is good and thorough: > http://www.bpurcell.org/viewContent.cfm?ContentID=121 > > > -Helge > > > > -Original Message- > From: Rick Sanders [mailto:r...@webenergy.ca] > Sent: 10. desember 2009 15:59 > To: cf-talk > Subject: Load-balancing servers > > > I have 2 Cold Fusion Enterprise servers. What I would like to do is balance > the load between 2 machines, and maybe more in the future. I have a very > large and demanding portal app that is going live soon. I've looked over > the > documentation and it doesn't seem to cover much about it. Can anyone offer > some insight on this? > > > > I know I'll have to change any absolute paths to UNC paths and set up any > ODBC databases, but is there anything else from the app side I need to do? > > > > Thanks! > > > > Rick Sanders > > Webenergy > > Canada: 902-431-7279 > > USA: 919-799-9076 > > Canada: www.webenergy.ca > > USA: www.webenergyusa.com > > > > > > > > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329056 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: scoping and speed
Funny thing is, even when I have specified scope for all my variables, I've still seen ColdFusion stack traces hunting around for scopes. However, please note this was a very intense script trying to calculate all prime numbers between 0 and 10,000,000. For the other 99.% of ColdFusion code out there, do what creates the most manageable, self-documenting code. The performance results will most likely be negligible. ~Brad Original Message Subject: Re: scoping and speed From: Charlie Griefer Date: Thu, December 10, 2009 9:59 am To: cf-talk "Because ColdFusion must search for variables when you do not specify the scope, you can improve performance by specifying the scope for all variables." ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329054 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
AW: scoping and speed
Yes... that's true. If you even scope the variables from the variables scope (EXCEPT in components, since they have their own variables scope) CF is around 4 times slower than addressing a variable from there without the prefix "variables". But this execution isn't very significant when your website is quite slow. It is 4 times faster not to scope variables from the variables scope, but in reality you won't notice that much improvement since accessing variables in comparison to querying a database is really a matter of order of magnitudes (So maybe "variables.whatever" executes in 12 nano seconds, where as "whatever" executes in 3 nano seconds, whereas a query will take 1ms which is 1000 nano seconds). In Railo you can enable a setting that actually forces you to scope your variables from the various scopes. So for instance if you do something like this: #id# and ID is in the URL scope Railo will complain that it doesn't know the variable ID (if this setting is turned on) and throw an error. So you HAVE TO write it like this: #url.id# Then Railo processes the page without error. Once you have scoped all your variables the system will be somewhat faster. Just imagine it like this: You are searching for a Peter (a variable) in a school (CF memory). You enter every classroom (scope) and check whether a pupil named "Peter" is sitting in it. If you find it, thats your variable. But if you know that Peter is sitting in the classroom number 55 then you go directly there and look for Peter. With the scope cascading disabled, Railo will not allow you to look for a "Peter" in the school without the classroom number. Hope that helps a little. Greetings from Switzerland Gert Franz Railo Technologies Professional Open Source skype: gert.franz g...@getrailo.com +41 76 5680 231 www.getrailo.com -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Charlie Griefer [mailto:charlie.grie...@gmail.com] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 10. Dezember 2009 16:59 An: cf-talk Betreff: Re: scoping and speed In theory, yes, as ColdFusion will have to hunt through the various scopes to find the exact variable that you're referencing. Whether it's noticeable or not.. hard to say. >From the CF8 docs ( http://livedocs.adobe.com/coldfusion/8/htmldocs/help.html?content=Variables_ 32.html ): "Because ColdFusion must search for variables when you do not specify the scope, you can improve performance by specifying the scope for all variables." I do actually recall hearing that on Railo, it was faster to -not- scope local variables. Not sure if that still holds true or not. On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Chad Gray wrote: > > If you don't scope your local variables does the page run slower? > > IE. #variables.foo# vs. #foo# > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329053 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Faster SMTP
> I have a lot of clients with email newsletters and they all > seem to send them out at the same time which backs up in the > cfspooler. I have one client in particular that can't wait > on the emails from the forms on his site so I was looking > into some solutions that would allow their mail to go directly > to our mail server. I am looking at this one. How many messages are we talking about? I've generally found that writing MSG files directly to the pickup folder of the Microsoft SMTP service (bundled with IIS) gets them out WAY faster than anything else I've tried. This, of course, assumes you're on Windows and have access to configure the server. The component you linked to has some nice features that will handle some of the more complex tasks of creating the message file (multi-mime, etc.). Overall it doesn't look too bad if you need those features. -Justin Scott ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329052 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
Re: Load-balancing servers
Here is a couple of Clustering FAQs that I wrote back in 2007, which may have some points of interest for you: http://speeves.erikin.com/2007/02/how-to-setup-apache-2-with-coldfusion-7.html http://speeves.erikin.com/2007/01/coldfusion-clustering-faq.html speeves On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 9:52 AM, WebSite CFTalk wrote: > > Maybe something like: > > - Hardware load balancer in front of web/app servers, or NLB load balancing > between web/app servers (Windows) > - Instead of UNC path to shared folders synchronize web folders/content > folders using DFS Replication (Windows 2003 R2 - Windows 2008) > - If windows 2008, IIS 7.5 with shared config. > > Clustering CF is covered many places, this one is good and thorough: > http://www.bpurcell.org/viewContent.cfm?ContentID=121 > > > -Helge > > > > -Original Message- > From: Rick Sanders [mailto:r...@webenergy.ca] > Sent: 10. desember 2009 15:59 > To: cf-talk > Subject: Load-balancing servers > > > I have 2 Cold Fusion Enterprise servers. What I would like to do is balance > the load between 2 machines, and maybe more in the future. I have a very > large and demanding portal app that is going live soon. I've looked over > the > documentation and it doesn't seem to cover much about it. Can anyone offer > some insight on this? > > > > I know I'll have to change any absolute paths to UNC paths and set up any > ODBC databases, but is there anything else from the app side I need to do? > > > > Thanks! > > > > Rick Sanders > > Webenergy > > Canada: 902-431-7279 > > USA: 919-799-9076 > > Canada: www.webenergy.ca > > USA: www.webenergyusa.com > > > > > > > > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329051 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Load-balancing servers
Rick, We used Configuration 3 that is mentioned on the link Helge provided. It has worked great and we didn't have to do any code updates for it (going from one version of CF to another is a different story). One thing we did notice though, you need to make sure the settings are the same across the board, others, sessions will react differently and in one case we had people have to reestablish their session on each request. Our clusters are setup to replicate sessions, round robin and be sticky. We've had pretty good results with this setup, Phil On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:52 AM, WebSite CFTalk wrote: > > Maybe something like: > > - Hardware load balancer in front of web/app servers, or NLB load balancing > between web/app servers (Windows) > - Instead of UNC path to shared folders synchronize web folders/content > folders using DFS Replication (Windows 2003 R2 - Windows 2008) > - If windows 2008, IIS 7.5 with shared config. > > Clustering CF is covered many places, this one is good and thorough: > http://www.bpurcell.org/viewContent.cfm?ContentID=121 > > > -Helge > > > > -Original Message- > From: Rick Sanders [mailto:r...@webenergy.ca] > Sent: 10. desember 2009 15:59 > To: cf-talk > Subject: Load-balancing servers > > > I have 2 Cold Fusion Enterprise servers. What I would like to do is balance > the load between 2 machines, and maybe more in the future. I have a very > large and demanding portal app that is going live soon. I've looked over > the > documentation and it doesn't seem to cover much about it. Can anyone offer > some insight on this? > > > > I know I'll have to change any absolute paths to UNC paths and set up any > ODBC databases, but is there anything else from the app side I need to do? > > > > Thanks! > > > > Rick Sanders > > Webenergy > > Canada: 902-431-7279 > > USA: 919-799-9076 > > Canada: www.webenergy.ca > > USA: www.webenergyusa.com > > > > > > > > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329050 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Load-balancing servers
Rick, The questions to ask are - what are you doing with session variabls and client variables, and .. What are the capabilities of your chosen load balancing method. Remember that the potential here is for a user to bounce back and forth between your servers while surfing your site - so you have to be able to imagine the impact of that on the user. Will he lose his session? Will that matter? Etc. If you are using a hardware load balancer they typically come with choices to help mitigate these issues (like sticky sessions for example). As for files - you have to be able to either sync files between the servers or use a shared file storage - and there are trade offs to each of these approaches. -mark Mark A. Kruger, CFG, MCSE (402) 408-3733 ext 105 www.cfwebtools.com www.coldfusionmuse.com www.necfug.com -Original Message- From: Rick Sanders [mailto:r...@webenergy.ca] Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 8:59 AM To: cf-talk Subject: Load-balancing servers I have 2 Cold Fusion Enterprise servers. What I would like to do is balance the load between 2 machines, and maybe more in the future. I have a very large and demanding portal app that is going live soon. I've looked over the documentation and it doesn't seem to cover much about it. Can anyone offer some insight on this? I know I'll have to change any absolute paths to UNC paths and set up any ODBC databases, but is there anything else from the app side I need to do? Thanks! Rick Sanders Webenergy Canada: 902-431-7279 USA: 919-799-9076 Canada: www.webenergy.ca USA: www.webenergyusa.com ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329049 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: convert this cfscript back to tag?
Ok... But why? Other than the pound signs it seems fine to me... Except that
form.ID will always be the last item in the list once you are done with the
loop.
Mark A. Kruger, CFG, MCSE
(402) 408-3733 ext 105
www.cfwebtools.com
www.coldfusionmuse.com
www.necfug.com
-Original Message-
From: Glyn Jackson [mailto:glyn.jack...@newebia.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 8:43 AM
To: cf-talk
Subject: convert this cfscript back to tag?
Hi all,
could someone convert this cfscript back to tag?
for(i=1;i lte listlen(#form.whatToUpdate#,",");i++){
tempVal = #listgetat(form.whatToUpdate,i,",")#;
form.ID = #tempVal#; //Option ID
form.newRank = form["rank_" & #tempVal#];
}
thanks
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329048
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
RE: convert this cfscript back to tag?
Glyn,
Hope this helps!
Dave Phillips
-Original Message-
From: Glyn Jackson [mailto:glyn.jack...@newebia.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 8:43 AM
To: cf-talk
Subject: convert this cfscript back to tag?
Hi all,
could someone convert this cfscript back to tag?
for(i=1;i lte listlen(#form.whatToUpdate#,",");i++){
tempVal = #listgetat(form.whatToUpdate,i,",")#;
form.ID = #tempVal#; //Option ID
form.newRank = form["rank_" & #tempVal#];
}
thanks
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329044
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: CF Printer list?
On Wednesday 09 Dec 2009, Yuliang Ruan wrote: > in CFIDE, the printer list is definitely blank...but how did it get that > way? and how does that list get populated? Samba ? CUPS ? -- Helping to carefully morph niches as part of the IT team of the year, '09 and '08 This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at Halliwells LLP, 3 Hardman Square, Spinningfields, Manchester, M3 3EB. A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office together with a list of those non members who are referred to as partners. We use the word partner to refer to a member of the LLP, or an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualifications. Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. CONFIDENTIALITY This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 2500. For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.co ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329042 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: convert this cfscript back to tag?
-- s. isaac dealey :: AutLabs Creating meaningful employment for people with Autism http://www.autlabs.com ph: 817.385.0301 http://onTap.riaforge.org/blog ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329046 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: convert this cfscript back to tag?
~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329043 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: scoping and speed
In theory, yes, as ColdFusion will have to hunt through the various scopes to find the exact variable that you're referencing. Whether it's noticeable or not.. hard to say. >From the CF8 docs ( http://livedocs.adobe.com/coldfusion/8/htmldocs/help.html?content=Variables_32.html ): "Because ColdFusion must search for variables when you do not specify the scope, you can improve performance by specifying the scope for all variables." I do actually recall hearing that on Railo, it was faster to -not- scope local variables. Not sure if that still holds true or not. On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Chad Gray wrote: > > If you don't scope your local variables does the page run slower? > > IE. #variables.foo# vs. #foo# > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329047 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Load-balancing servers
Maybe something like: - Hardware load balancer in front of web/app servers, or NLB load balancing between web/app servers (Windows) - Instead of UNC path to shared folders synchronize web folders/content folders using DFS Replication (Windows 2003 R2 - Windows 2008) - If windows 2008, IIS 7.5 with shared config. Clustering CF is covered many places, this one is good and thorough: http://www.bpurcell.org/viewContent.cfm?ContentID=121 -Helge -Original Message- From: Rick Sanders [mailto:r...@webenergy.ca] Sent: 10. desember 2009 15:59 To: cf-talk Subject: Load-balancing servers I have 2 Cold Fusion Enterprise servers. What I would like to do is balance the load between 2 machines, and maybe more in the future. I have a very large and demanding portal app that is going live soon. I've looked over the documentation and it doesn't seem to cover much about it. Can anyone offer some insight on this? I know I'll have to change any absolute paths to UNC paths and set up any ODBC databases, but is there anything else from the app side I need to do? Thanks! Rick Sanders Webenergy Canada: 902-431-7279 USA: 919-799-9076 Canada: www.webenergy.ca USA: www.webenergyusa.com ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329045 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Faster SMTP
We're using Infusion Mail server for this kinf of thing. Works really well and its really fast. http://www.coolfusion.com/downloads/index.cfm?CFID=951923&CFTOKEN=25237943 Kind regards, Erik-Jan Op donderdag 10-12-2009 om 10:10 uur [tijdzone -0500], schreef webmas...@pegweb.com: > I have a lot of clients with email newsletters and they all seem to send > them out at the same time which backs up in the cfspooler. I have one > client in particular that can't wait on the emails from the forms on his > site so I was looking into some solutions that would allow their mail to > go directly to our mail server. I am looking at this one. > > > > http://aspfusion.net/advsmtp-d.htm > > > > Anybody used this or have other suggestions? > > > > > > > > > > > > ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329041 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: convert this cfscript back to tag?
I think that's right...
-Original Message-
From: Glyn Jackson [mailto:glyn.jack...@newebia.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 9:43 AM
To: cf-talk
Subject: convert this cfscript back to tag?
Hi all,
could someone convert this cfscript back to tag?
for(i=1;i lte listlen(#form.whatToUpdate#,",");i++){
tempVal = #listgetat(form.whatToUpdate,i,",")#;
form.ID = #tempVal#; //Option ID
form.newRank = form["rank_" & #tempVal#];
}
thanks
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329040
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
scoping and speed
If you don't scope your local variables does the page run slower? IE. #variables.foo# vs. #foo# ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329039 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Faster SMTP
I have a lot of clients with email newsletters and they all seem to send them out at the same time which backs up in the cfspooler. I have one client in particular that can't wait on the emails from the forms on his site so I was looking into some solutions that would allow their mail to go directly to our mail server. I am looking at this one. http://aspfusion.net/advsmtp-d.htm Anybody used this or have other suggestions? ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329038 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
convert this cfscript back to tag?
Hi all,
could someone convert this cfscript back to tag?
for(i=1;i lte listlen(#form.whatToUpdate#,",");i++){
tempVal = #listgetat(form.whatToUpdate,i,",")#;
form.ID = #tempVal#; //Option ID
form.newRank = form["rank_" & #tempVal#];
}
thanks
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329037
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Load-balancing servers
I have 2 Cold Fusion Enterprise servers. What I would like to do is balance the load between 2 machines, and maybe more in the future. I have a very large and demanding portal app that is going live soon. I've looked over the documentation and it doesn't seem to cover much about it. Can anyone offer some insight on this? I know I'll have to change any absolute paths to UNC paths and set up any ODBC databases, but is there anything else from the app side I need to do? Thanks! Rick Sanders Webenergy Canada: 902-431-7279 USA: 919-799-9076 Canada: www.webenergy.ca USA: www.webenergyusa.com ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329036 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Using XML to Create schema/database
Tom, Usually the detail portion of the error will include more information - usually the error returned from the database. Make sure that the database exists and has CREATE and ALTER permissions (if you want DataMgr to create tables and columns). If you have any more trouble, you can check out the DataMgr Group http://groups.google.com/group/datamgr or contact me directly http://www.bryantwebconsulting.com/contact.cfm Thanks, Steve > I do have one question on the loadXml function. > > I'm getting a error that says "LoadXML Failed(verify datasource > "MySQLDS" is correct)". The DSN is valid, where/ how can I trouble > shoot this? > > Thanks, > tom ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329035 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
Re: Sending a Fax
Ok I'll try that Robert Thanks for your help >> Is there a way I can just simply move it down the page slightly, at the >minute its at the very top with no margins >> even if i could increase the margin, it would move down the page > >Sine there's no code samples I can really tell what you are doing, but in >print world the output is likely SGML. You should be able to output some >line breaks or page feeds to the printer controls prior to the text string - >in CF - that's #chr(10)# and #chr(13)#. > >Geez - tried to include some links but Adobe CF docs is all coming up >"broken links" right now. When they come back look up "carriage return" and >"line feed". Should be straight forward. > > >Robert B. Harrison >Director of Interactive Services >Austin & Williams >125 Kennedy Drive, Suite 100 >Hauppauge NY 11788 >P : 631.231.6600 Ext. 119 >F : 631.434.7022 >http://www.austin-williams.com > >Great advertising can't be either/or. It must be &. > >Plug in to our blog: A&W Unplugged >http://www.austin-williams.com/unplugged > > > > >__ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature >database 4673 (20091209) __ > >The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > >http://www.eset.com ~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:329034 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
