RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
On another machine we tried the same tests and found the code took
1680ms to run 1000 iterations. Interestingly enough we rewrote Sean's
code in Java and retried the tests. From Java we could do 1000
iterations in 1265ms. The Java code is below.
import java.util.*;
import java.io.*;
import org.xml.sax.*;
import com.allaire.wddx.*;
public class STest
{
String xmlContent = null;
WddxDeserializer deserializer = null;
public STest(String filePath) throws Exception
{
deserializer = new
WddxDeserializer(org.apache.xerces.parsers.SAXParser);
readInXML(filePath);
}
public static void main(String args[])
{
try
{
if (args.length 2)
{
System.out.println(Usage: alchemy.STest filepath
deserializations [iterations]);
return;
}
int iterations = 1;
if (args.length == 3)
iterations = Integer.parseInt(args[2]);
STest test = new STest(args[0]);
for (int i=0; iiterations; i++)
{
test.run(Integer.parseInt(args[1]));
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
ex.printStackTrace();
}
}
private void readInXML(String filePath) throws Exception
{
FileReader reader = null;
try
{
reader = new FileReader(filePath);
xmlContent = ;
char[] buf = new char[512];
int read = -1;
while ((read = reader.read(buf)) != -1)
{
xmlContent += new String(buf, 0, read);
}
xmlContent = xmlContent.trim();
}
finally
{
if (reader != null)
reader.close();
}
}
public void run(int nTimes) throws Exception
{
Map map = null;
InputSource source = null;
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i=0; inTimes; i++)
{
source = new InputSource(new StringReader(xmlContent));
map = (Map)deserializer.deserialize(source);
}
long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println(It took: + (end - start) + ms to deserialize
+ nTimes + times.);
}
}
Matt Liotta
President CEO
Montara Software, Inc.
http://www.montarasoftware.com/
V: 415-577-8070
F: 415-341-8906
P: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 10:22 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
P3 866 384 RAM CFMX (2543ms)
Using the below code on the same machine (5908ms)
cfparam name=URL.loop type=numeric default=1/
cfset request.File = c:\cfusionmx\wwwroot\test\joe.wddx/
cffile action=READ file=#request.file# variable=temp/
cfset loop = URL.loop/ cfset request.StartTime = GetTickCount()/
cfloop index=i from=1 to=#loop#
cfscript
tempDoc = XmlParse(temp);
ctemp = StructNew();
for(itr = 1; itr lte
ArrayLen(tempDoc.wddxpacket.data.struct.XmlChildren); itr = itr + 1)
StructInsert(ctemp,
tempDoc.wddxpacket.data.struct.var[itr].XmlAttributes.name,
tempDoc.wddxpacket.data.struct.var[itr].XmlChildren[1].XmlText);
/cfscript
/cfloop
cfoutput
#GetTickCount() - request.StartTime# ms
cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/
/cfoutput
Matt Liotta
President CEO
Montara Software, Inc.
http://www.montarasoftware.com/
V: 415-577-8070
F: 415-341-8906
P: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 9:11 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 10:27 , Joe Eugene wrote:
Below are the details of the code that is running slow on CFMX.
I've put together a very simple test to time wddx2cfml on various
systems.
I don't have CF5 to run it on but hopefully some folks here will
be
able
to confirm / deny the speed differences.
Two files:
- xfile.cfm reads the WDDX packet and then times cfwddx repeatedly
deserializing it
- joe.wddx is Joe's WDDX (with a correction: there's a missing
/string
on line 34!)
I tested this on a PowerMac G4 800MHz with
http://127.0.0.1/xfile.cfm?loop=
1000 and it consistently executed in 4000ms.
xfile.cfm:
!--- xfile.cfm ---
cfparam name=URL.loop type=numeric default=1/
cfset request.File = /home/coldfusionmx/wwwroot/bacfug/joe.wddx/
cffile action=READ file=#request.file# variable=temp/
cfset loop = URL.loop/
cfset request.StartTime = GetTickCount()/
cfloop index=i from=1 to=#loop#
cfwddx action=wddx2cfml input=#temp# output=ctemp
/cfloop
cfoutput
#GetTickCount() - request.StartTime# ms
cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/
/cfoutput
!--- end ---
joe.wddx:
wddxPacket version='1.0'header/headerdatastructvar
name='ALTTAG'stringMS Commercial/string/varvar
name='BODY'stringlt;Pgt;All MSamp;reg; models are made in the
USA to
the highest quality standards.lt;/Pgt;char
code='0A'/lt;Pgt;The
MSamp;reg; Series grew out of our
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
Joe Eugene wrote: Noticed the evaluate as well but thats very minor.. right? 10ms maybe? Yeah, but it may be yet another 10 ms. If you have a lot of traffic and there need to be a lot of evaluates it should introduce extra CPU load. Jesse __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 10:27 , Joe Eugene wrote: Below are the details of the code that is running slow on CFMX. I've put together a very simple test to time wddx2cfml on various systems. I don't have CF5 to run it on but hopefully some folks here will be able to confirm / deny the speed differences. Two files: - xfile.cfm reads the WDDX packet and then times cfwddx repeatedly deserializing it - joe.wddx is Joe's WDDX (with a correction: there's a missing /string on line 34!) I tested this on a PowerMac G4 800MHz with http://127.0.0.1/xfile.cfm?loop= 1000 and it consistently executed in 4000ms. xfile.cfm: !--- xfile.cfm --- cfparam name=URL.loop type=numeric default=1/ cfset request.File = /home/coldfusionmx/wwwroot/bacfug/joe.wddx/ cffile action=READ file=#request.file# variable=temp/ cfset loop = URL.loop/ cfset request.StartTime = GetTickCount()/ cfloop index=i from=1 to=#loop# cfwddx action=wddx2cfml input=#temp# output=ctemp /cfloop cfoutput #GetTickCount() - request.StartTime# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput !--- end --- joe.wddx: wddxPacket version='1.0'header/headerdatastructvar name='ALTTAG'stringMS Commercial/string/varvar name='BODY'stringlt;Pgt;All MSamp;reg; models are made in the USA to the highest quality standards.lt;/Pgt;char code='0A'/lt;Pgt;The MSamp;reg; Series grew out of our decades of experience with Highlinelt;SUPgt;TMlt;/SUPgt;, Trimline, and units combined with the time-proven technologies of The Asianamp;reg; series. All MSamp;reg; models are made in the USA to the highest quality standards. lt;/Pgt;char code='0A'/lt;H2gt;Key Distinguishing Featurelt;/H2gt;char code='0A'/lt;Pgt;North Americalt;/Pgt;char code='0A'/lt;TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 width=100% border=0gt;char code='0A'/lt;TBODYgt;char code='0A'/lt;TRgt;char code='0A'/lt;TD class=headerWhite bgColor=#ff6633gt;Related Links and Brochures:lt;/TDgt;lt;/TRgt;lt;/TBODYgt;lt;/TABLEgt;char code='0A'/lt;Pgt;lt;A target=_new href=http://url/pdfs/P1903.pdfgt;The MS Series - Commercial (PDF)lt;/Agt;lt;/Pgt;/string/varvar name='CONTENTITEMID'string11/string/varvar name='CONTENTTYPEID'stringPMP/string/varvar name='DESCRIPTION'stringMS Commercial have mechanical non-computing specifically designed for industrial, and fleet applications./string/varvar name='ERRORS'string/string/varvar name='FILES'stringcom.jpg,P103.pdf/string/varvar name='KEYWORDS'string, industrial, fleet, north america/string/varvar name='NAVTEXT'stringMS-Commercial/string/varvar name='PUBLISHDATE'dateTime2002-3-7T0:0:0-5:0/dateTime/varvar name='PUBLISHDAY'string07/string/varvar name='PUBLISHMONTH'string3/string/varvar name='PUBLISHYEAR'string2002/string/varvar name='TITLE'stringThe MS Series - Commercial/string/varvar name='UPLOADIMAGE'string2A2.8_MS_com.jpg/string/varvar name='UPLOADPDF'stringP1903.pdf/string/varvar name='USERNAME'stringabc/string/varvar name='VERSIONNUMBER'number42/number/varvar name='VERSIONSTATUSID'stringPUB/string/var /struct/data/wddxPacket Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
On Wednesday, July 31, 2002, at 09:11 , Sean A Corfield wrote: I've put together a very simple test to time wddx2cfml on various systems. ... cfset request.File = /home/coldfusionmx/wwwroot/bacfug/joe.wddx/ I put both files in a 'bacfug' folder inside my web root - old habits die hard :) If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
/test2.cfm?loop=1000 CF MX P3 500 Debugging on No Trusted Cache 5709 ms - 6629 ms I don't have CF 5.0 either. -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 11:11 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE) On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 10:27 , Joe Eugene wrote: Below are the details of the code that is running slow on CFMX. I've put together a very simple test to time wddx2cfml on various systems. I don't have CF5 to run it on but hopefully some folks here will be able to confirm / deny the speed differences. Two files: - xfile.cfm reads the WDDX packet and then times cfwddx repeatedly deserializing it - joe.wddx is Joe's WDDX (with a correction: there's a missing /string on line 34!) I tested this on a PowerMac G4 800MHz with http://127.0.0.1/xfile.cfm?loop= 1000 and it consistently executed in 4000ms. xfile.cfm: !--- xfile.cfm --- cfparam name=URL.loop type=numeric default=1/ cfset request.File = /home/coldfusionmx/wwwroot/bacfug/joe.wddx/ cffile action=READ file=#request.file# variable=temp/ cfset loop = URL.loop/ cfset request.StartTime = GetTickCount()/ cfloop index=i from=1 to=#loop# cfwddx action=wddx2cfml input=#temp# output=ctemp /cfloop cfoutput #GetTickCount() - request.StartTime# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput !--- end --- joe.wddx: wddxPacket version='1.0'header/headerdatastructvar name='ALTTAG'stringMS Commercial/string/varvar name='BODY'stringlt;Pgt;All MSamp;reg; models are made in the USA to the highest quality standards.lt;/Pgt;char code='0A'/lt;Pgt;The MSamp;reg; Series grew out of our decades of experience with Highlinelt;SUPgt;TMlt;/SUPgt;, Trimline, and units combined with the time-proven technologies of The Asianamp;reg; series. All MSamp;reg; models are made in the USA to the highest quality standards. lt;/Pgt;char code='0A'/lt;H2gt;Key Distinguishing Featurelt;/H2gt;char code='0A'/lt;Pgt;North Americalt;/Pgt;char code='0A'/lt;TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 width=100% border=0gt;char code='0A'/lt;TBODYgt;char code='0A'/lt;TRgt;char code='0A'/lt;TD class=headerWhite bgColor=#ff6633gt;Related Links and Brochures:lt;/TDgt;lt;/TRgt;lt;/TBODYgt;lt;/TABLEgt;char code='0A'/lt;Pgt;lt;A target=_new href=http://@url@/pdfs/P1903.pdfgt;The MS Series - Commercial (PDF)lt;/Agt;lt;/Pgt;/string/varvar name='CONTENTITEMID'string11/string/varvar name='CONTENTTYPEID'stringPMP/string/varvar name='DESCRIPTION'stringMS Commercial have mechanical non-computing specifically designed for industrial, and fleet applications./string/varvar name='ERRORS'string/string/varvar name='FILES'stringcom.jpg,P103.pdf/string/varvar name='KEYWORDS'string, industrial, fleet, north america/string/varvar name='NAVTEXT'stringMS-Commercial/string/varvar name='PUBLISHDATE'dateTime2002-3-7T0:0:0-5:0/dateTime/varvar name='PUBLISHDAY'string07/string/varvar name='PUBLISHMONTH'string3/string/varvar name='PUBLISHYEAR'string2002/string/varvar name='TITLE'stringThe MS Series - Commercial/string/varvar name='UPLOADIMAGE'string2A2.8_MS_com.jpg/string/varvar name='UPLOADPDF'stringP1903.pdf/string/varvar name='USERNAME'stringabc/string/varvar name='VERSIONNUMBER'number42/number/varvar name='VERSIONSTATUSID'stringPUB/string/var /struct/data/wddxPacket Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
I don't have CF5 to run it on but hopefully some folks here will be able to confirm / deny the speed differences. CFMX p3 733 Debugging on No Trusted Cache 3400 ms (varies a little, like maybe 100ms) CF 5 same machine 740 ms Also, to run on my cf5 install I hade to modify this: cfoutput #GetTickCount() - request.StartTime# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput to this: cfoutput #evaluate(GetTickCount() - request.StartTime)# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput ---why is that? -Craig __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
Wow. It looks like we can put evaluatives between hashes again. Shades of CF3. To answer your question, in CF4-5, you cannot put evaluatives between hashes. - Original Message - From: Craig Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 10:59 am Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE) I don't have CF5 to run it on but hopefully some folks here will be able to confirm / deny the speed differences. CFMX p3 733 Debugging on No Trusted Cache 3400 ms (varies a little, like maybe 100ms) CF 5 same machine 740 ms Also, to run on my cf5 install I hade to modify this: cfoutput #GetTickCount() - request.StartTime# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput to this: cfoutput #evaluate(GetTickCount() - request.StartTime)# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput ---why is that? -Craig __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
P3 866 384 RAM CFMX (2543ms) Using the below code on the same machine (5908ms) cfparam name=URL.loop type=numeric default=1/ cfset request.File = c:\cfusionmx\wwwroot\test\joe.wddx/ cffile action=READ file=#request.file# variable=temp/ cfset loop = URL.loop/ cfset request.StartTime = GetTickCount()/ cfloop index=i from=1 to=#loop# cfscript tempDoc = XmlParse(temp); ctemp = StructNew(); for(itr = 1; itr lte ArrayLen(tempDoc.wddxpacket.data.struct.XmlChildren); itr = itr + 1) StructInsert(ctemp, tempDoc.wddxpacket.data.struct.var[itr].XmlAttributes.name, tempDoc.wddxpacket.data.struct.var[itr].XmlChildren[1].XmlText); /cfscript /cfloop cfoutput #GetTickCount() - request.StartTime# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 9:11 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE) On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 10:27 , Joe Eugene wrote: Below are the details of the code that is running slow on CFMX. I've put together a very simple test to time wddx2cfml on various systems. I don't have CF5 to run it on but hopefully some folks here will be able to confirm / deny the speed differences. Two files: - xfile.cfm reads the WDDX packet and then times cfwddx repeatedly deserializing it - joe.wddx is Joe's WDDX (with a correction: there's a missing /string on line 34!) I tested this on a PowerMac G4 800MHz with http://127.0.0.1/xfile.cfm?loop= 1000 and it consistently executed in 4000ms. xfile.cfm: !--- xfile.cfm --- cfparam name=URL.loop type=numeric default=1/ cfset request.File = /home/coldfusionmx/wwwroot/bacfug/joe.wddx/ cffile action=READ file=#request.file# variable=temp/ cfset loop = URL.loop/ cfset request.StartTime = GetTickCount()/ cfloop index=i from=1 to=#loop# cfwddx action=wddx2cfml input=#temp# output=ctemp /cfloop cfoutput #GetTickCount() - request.StartTime# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput !--- end --- joe.wddx: wddxPacket version='1.0'header/headerdatastructvar name='ALTTAG'stringMS Commercial/string/varvar name='BODY'stringlt;Pgt;All MSamp;reg; models are made in the USA to the highest quality standards.lt;/Pgt;char code='0A'/lt;Pgt;The MSamp;reg; Series grew out of our decades of experience with Highlinelt;SUPgt;TMlt;/SUPgt;, Trimline, and units combined with the time-proven technologies of The Asianamp;reg; series. All MSamp;reg; models are made in the USA to the highest quality standards. lt;/Pgt;char code='0A'/lt;H2gt;Key Distinguishing Featurelt;/H2gt;char code='0A'/lt;Pgt;North Americalt;/Pgt;char code='0A'/lt;TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 width=100% border=0gt;char code='0A'/lt;TBODYgt;char code='0A'/lt;TRgt;char code='0A'/lt;TD class=headerWhite bgColor=#ff6633gt;Related Links and Brochures:lt;/TDgt;lt;/TRgt;lt;/TBODYgt;lt;/TABLEgt;char code='0A'/lt;Pgt;lt;A target=_new href=http://@url@/pdfs/P1903.pdfgt;The MS Series - Commercial (PDF)lt;/Agt;lt;/Pgt;/string/varvar name='CONTENTITEMID'string11/string/varvar name='CONTENTTYPEID'stringPMP/string/varvar name='DESCRIPTION'stringMS Commercial have mechanical non-computing specifically designed for industrial, and fleet applications./string/varvar name='ERRORS'string/string/varvar name='FILES'stringcom.jpg,P103.pdf/string/varvar name='KEYWORDS'string, industrial, fleet, north america/string/varvar name='NAVTEXT'stringMS-Commercial/string/varvar name='PUBLISHDATE'dateTime2002-3-7T0:0:0-5:0/dateTime/varvar name='PUBLISHDAY'string07/string/varvar name='PUBLISHMONTH'string3/string/varvar name='PUBLISHYEAR'string2002/string/varvar name='TITLE'stringThe MS Series - Commercial/string/varvar name='UPLOADIMAGE'string2A2.8_MS_com.jpg/string/varvar name='UPLOADPDF'stringP1903.pdf/string/varvar name='USERNAME'stringabc/string/varvar name='VERSIONNUMBER'number42/number/varvar name='VERSIONSTATUSID'stringPUB/string/var /struct/data/wddxPacket Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
On Wednesday, July 31, 2002, at 09:11 AM, Sean A Corfield wrote: I tested this on a PowerMac G4 800MHz with http://127.0.0.1/xfile.cfm?loop= 1000 and it consistently executed in 4000ms. First, the last line of the WDDX file needs added as first char. Second, same config as Sean Running everything on same box OS X Aqua GUI CFMX Airport wireless networking IE Browser 33 Processes in all-- about the minimum for all on one box results in the 4000-4200 range Same as above except access from separate machine via Airport OS X Aqua GUI CFMX Airport wireless networking 32 Processes in all-- about the minimum for using Full (workstation) OS X as a Server OS (Apple makes a separate OS X, OS X Server that is configured/tuned for Web/Lan serving) results consistently in the 3654-3677 range (one result was 4043) Dick __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
I guess this proves both our tests..(Load Test/Ticket Count) for wddx on CFMX and CF5.0 Under normal load (5-10 hits per minute) this might not be an issue... but for high traffic sites/ Load testing the app.. this really cranks the machine. Joe - Original Message - From: Craig Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 12:59 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE) I don't have CF5 to run it on but hopefully some folks here will be able to confirm / deny the speed differences. CFMX p3 733 Debugging on No Trusted Cache 3400 ms (varies a little, like maybe 100ms) CF 5 same machine 740 ms Also, to run on my cf5 install I hade to modify this: cfoutput #GetTickCount() - request.StartTime# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput to this: cfoutput #evaluate(GetTickCount() - request.StartTime)# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput ---why is that? -Craig __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
While CFMX clearly doesn't perform anywhere close to as well with WDDX as CF 5 did, you now have a new option for handling WDDX with CFMX. You can make use of JAXB and the Java world and easily cast the resulting objects into CF. If you want high performance WDDX/XML parsing in Java, you have to make use of JAXB. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 10:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE) I guess this proves both our tests..(Load Test/Ticket Count) for wddx on CFMX and CF5.0 Under normal load (5-10 hits per minute) this might not be an issue... but for high traffic sites/ Load testing the app.. this really cranks the machine. Joe - Original Message - From: Craig Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 12:59 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE) I don't have CF5 to run it on but hopefully some folks here will be able to confirm / deny the speed differences. CFMX p3 733 Debugging on No Trusted Cache 3400 ms (varies a little, like maybe 100ms) CF 5 same machine 740 ms Also, to run on my cf5 install I hade to modify this: cfoutput #GetTickCount() - request.StartTime# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput to this: cfoutput #evaluate(GetTickCount() - request.StartTime)# ms cfdump label=deserialized packet var=#ctemp#/ /cfoutput ---why is that? -Craig __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Monday, July 29, 2002, at 09:11 , Sean A Corfield wrote: On Monday, July 29, 2002, at 07:31 , Joe Eugene wrote: MM's performance brief is probably based on optimized CFMX code and maybe optimized CF.50 code. Nope. As far as I know it's the exact same code run on both CF5 and CFMX. I will ask the QA lab to confirm this. I have confirmed with the CF QA team that the tests were run on identical code. It was not optimized for a specific version of CF. Satisfied? If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Sean, Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences between CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX Docs say 1.New in ColdFusion MX: ColdFusion preserves the case of column names in JavaScript. (Earlier releases converted query column names to lowercase.) (Does this mean JavaScript type casing?) 2.New in ColdFusion MX: This tag supports several encoding formats. The default encoding format is UTF-8. The tag interoperates with Unicode. What does #1 mean? If WDDX data is Stored in a DB and output using custom tags.. is there any internal CFMX implementation that would degrade performance compared to CF5.0? Thanks Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 9:26 AM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Monday, July 29, 2002, at 09:11 , Sean A Corfield wrote: On Monday, July 29, 2002, at 07:31 , Joe Eugene wrote: MM's performance brief is probably based on optimized CFMX code and maybe optimized CF.50 code. Nope. As far as I know it's the exact same code run on both CF5 and CFMX. I will ask the QA lab to confirm this. I have confirmed with the CF QA team that the tests were run on identical code. It was not optimized for a specific version of CF. Satisfied? If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 07:26 , Joe Eugene wrote: Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences between CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX Er, yes, it was written in C/C++ in CF5 and it's been rewritten in Java in CFMX. As has everything else. Read my lips Joe: CFMX is a complete rewrite. What does #1 mean? I don't know. I don't use JavaScript with queries so I don't know what the behavior was or how it changed. If WDDX data is Stored in a DB and output using custom tags.. is there any internal CFMX implementation that would degrade performance compared to CF5.0? Well, custom tag invocations are faster in CFMX than in CF5. I have no idea about WDDX. Do you *think* it is slower? Have you written a test case and *proved* there is a noticeable difference? Why don't you try it for yourself. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Sean, I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. I will try to write case/result...end of this week or so. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. Thanks Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:00 AM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 07:26 , Joe Eugene wrote: Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences between CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX Er, yes, it was written in C/C++ in CF5 and it's been rewritten in Java in CFMX. As has everything else. Read my lips Joe: CFMX is a complete rewrite. What does #1 mean? I don't know. I don't use JavaScript with queries so I don't know what the behavior was or how it changed. If WDDX data is Stored in a DB and output using custom tags.. is there any internal CFMX implementation that would degrade performance compared to CF5.0? Well, custom tag invocations are faster in CFMX than in CF5. I have no idea about WDDX. Do you *think* it is slower? Have you written a test case and *proved* there is a noticeable difference? Why don't you try it for yourself. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Hey Joe I'm curious...these objects...are they wddx packets stored in client scope which in turn is in your client variable datasource? Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:54 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Sean, I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. I will try to write case/result...end of this week or so. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. Thanks Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:00 AM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 07:26 , Joe Eugene wrote: Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences between CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX Er, yes, it was written in C/C++ in CF5 and it's been rewritten in Java in CFMX. As has everything else. Read my lips Joe: CFMX is a complete rewrite. What does #1 mean? I don't know. I don't use JavaScript with queries so I don't know what the behavior was or how it changed. If WDDX data is Stored in a DB and output using custom tags.. is there any internal CFMX implementation that would degrade performance compared to CF5.0? Well, custom tag invocations are faster in CFMX than in CF5. I have no idea about WDDX. Do you *think* it is slower? Have you written a test case and *proved* there is a noticeable difference? Why don't you try it for yourself. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Stace, No..Not Client Scope. That would be a real big problem..(client scope WDDX)... if all this turns out to be true(WDDX Serialize - Deserialize) performance in CFMX unless there is an optmized way(cfmx) to code WDDX. Yea.. WDDX in client scope is great... The App am dealing with...WDDX is written to the database for Content MGMT, i didnt code this.. am not sure.. why the developer used this method..The data is even redundant. Have you had a chance to LOAD TEST any Client Scope WDDX in CFMX..? Curious? Joe - Original Message - From: Stacy Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 12:10 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Hey Joe I'm curious...these objects...are they wddx packets stored in client scope which in turn is in your client variable datasource? Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:54 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Sean, I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. I will try to write case/result...end of this week or so. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. Thanks Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:00 AM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 07:26 , Joe Eugene wrote: Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences between CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX Er, yes, it was written in C/C++ in CF5 and it's been rewritten in Java in CFMX. As has everything else. Read my lips Joe: CFMX is a complete rewrite. What does #1 mean? I don't know. I don't use JavaScript with queries so I don't know what the behavior was or how it changed. If WDDX data is Stored in a DB and output using custom tags.. is there any internal CFMX implementation that would degrade performance compared to CF5.0? Well, custom tag invocations are faster in CFMX than in CF5. I have no idea about WDDX. Do you *think* it is slower? Have you written a test case and *proved* there is a noticeable difference? Why don't you try it for yourself. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
No I haven't...but if that were the case in your instance I would have suggested storing complex objects in session scope in cfmx rather then client wddx packets...but in your case it's obvious that's not applicable. I don't use all to much wddx, sorry can't contribute on that front... Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 1:15 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Stace, No..Not Client Scope. That would be a real big problem..(client scope WDDX)... if all this turns out to be true(WDDX Serialize - Deserialize) performance in CFMX unless there is an optmized way(cfmx) to code WDDX. Yea.. WDDX in client scope is great... The App am dealing with...WDDX is written to the database for Content MGMT, i didnt code this.. am not sure.. why the developer used this method..The data is even redundant. Have you had a chance to LOAD TEST any Client Scope WDDX in CFMX..? Curious? Joe - Original Message - From: Stacy Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 12:10 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Hey Joe I'm curious...these objects...are they wddx packets stored in client scope which in turn is in your client variable datasource? Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:54 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Sean, I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. I will try to write case/result...end of this week or so. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. Thanks Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:00 AM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 07:26 , Joe Eugene wrote: Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences between CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX Er, yes, it was written in C/C++ in CF5 and it's been rewritten in Java in CFMX. As has everything else. Read my lips Joe: CFMX is a complete rewrite. What does #1 mean? I don't know. I don't use JavaScript with queries so I don't know what the behavior was or how it changed. If WDDX data is Stored in a DB and output using custom tags.. is there any internal CFMX implementation that would degrade performance compared to CF5.0? Well, custom tag invocations are faster in CFMX than in CF5. I have no idea about WDDX. Do you *think* it is slower? Have you written a test case and *proved* there is a noticeable difference? Why don't you try it for yourself. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
I have successfully been able to achieve great performance out of WDDX intensive applications using CF 4.5, 5, and MX. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 10:15 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Stace, No..Not Client Scope. That would be a real big problem..(client scope WDDX)... if all this turns out to be true(WDDX Serialize - Deserialize) performance in CFMX unless there is an optmized way(cfmx) to code WDDX. Yea.. WDDX in client scope is great... The App am dealing with...WDDX is written to the database for Content MGMT, i didnt code this.. am not sure.. why the developer used this method..The data is even redundant. Have you had a chance to LOAD TEST any Client Scope WDDX in CFMX..? Curious? Joe - Original Message - From: Stacy Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 12:10 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Hey Joe I'm curious...these objects...are they wddx packets stored in client scope which in turn is in your client variable datasource? Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:54 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Sean, I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. I will try to write case/result...end of this week or so. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. Thanks Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:00 AM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 07:26 , Joe Eugene wrote: Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences between CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX Er, yes, it was written in C/C++ in CF5 and it's been rewritten in Java in CFMX. As has everything else. Read my lips Joe: CFMX is a complete rewrite. What does #1 mean? I don't know. I don't use JavaScript with queries so I don't know what the behavior was or how it changed. If WDDX data is Stored in a DB and output using custom tags.. is there any internal CFMX implementation that would degrade performance compared to CF5.0? Well, custom tag invocations are faster in CFMX than in CF5. I have no idea about WDDX. Do you *think* it is slower? Have you written a test case and *proved* there is a noticeable difference? Why don't you try it for yourself. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 08:54 , Joe Eugene wrote: I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. OK, that sounds like good progress so maybe we'll all stop ragging on you :) Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. Hmm, interesting. That should be pretty easy to performance test. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Well, it's apples and oranges... in CF5, WDDX2CFML was written in C/C++ and now it's completely rewritten in Java. It's just... different code. I' m not on the product team so I don't have access to the source. Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. It's Unicode capable now - but that's just by virtue of it being implemented in Java. As far as I know, there were no specific behavioral changes (except what's in the release notes etc). Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 10:14 , Joe Eugene wrote: The App am dealing with...WDDX is written to the database for Content MGMT, i didnt code this.. am not sure.. why the developer used this method..The data is even redundant. Sounds like Spectra :) Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
OK, that sounds like good progress so maybe we'll all stop ragging on you :) You havent given out any peformance tests.. other than MM Perf brief I am NOT sure...you guys have any performance test for the details we are talking about here...What can you expect from developers..? Well, it's apples and oranges... in CF5, WDDX2CFML was written in C/C++ and now it's completely rewritten in Java. It's just... different code. I' m not on the product team so I don't have access to the source. Repeated... no spec details given. This news was public.. in NEO/Beta releases. What would be good information is some like... (eg IIF scales differently in CFMX Vs CF5.0) SO the question is : Are there any changes/updates made to WDDX...in CFMX Vs CF5.0 (regardless of JAVA/C++ engine.. unicode)? that can possibly make it run slower (like the COM issue) yet Unknown(TESTING). Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 2:17 PM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 08:54 , Joe Eugene wrote: I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. OK, that sounds like good progress so maybe we'll all stop ragging on you :) Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. Hmm, interesting. That should be pretty easy to performance test. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Well, it's apples and oranges... in CF5, WDDX2CFML was written in C/C++ and now it's completely rewritten in Java. It's just... different code. I' m not on the product team so I don't have access to the source. Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. It's Unicode capable now - but that's just by virtue of it being implemented in Java. As far as I know, there were no specific behavioral changes (except what's in the release notes etc). Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Can you give us some details? Is this performance equal in (CF 4.5, 5, and MX)? What software did you use for Load Testing? No of users? Machine? OS? Client Scope WDDX involved? Data store WDDX involved? Any performance results.. would be really appreciated. Joe - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 1:35 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? I have successfully been able to achieve great performance out of WDDX intensive applications using CF 4.5, 5, and MX. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 10:15 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Stace, No..Not Client Scope. That would be a real big problem..(client scope WDDX)... if all this turns out to be true(WDDX Serialize - Deserialize) performance in CFMX unless there is an optmized way(cfmx) to code WDDX. Yea.. WDDX in client scope is great... The App am dealing with...WDDX is written to the database for Content MGMT, i didnt code this.. am not sure.. why the developer used this method..The data is even redundant. Have you had a chance to LOAD TEST any Client Scope WDDX in CFMX..? Curious? Joe - Original Message - From: Stacy Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 12:10 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Hey Joe I'm curious...these objects...are they wddx packets stored in client scope which in turn is in your client variable datasource? Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:54 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Sean, I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. I will try to write case/result...end of this week or so. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. Thanks Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:00 AM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 07:26 , Joe Eugene wrote: Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences between CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX Er, yes, it was written in C/C++ in CF5 and it's been rewritten in Java in CFMX. As has everything else. Read my lips Joe: CFMX is a complete rewrite. What does #1 mean? I don't know. I don't use JavaScript with queries so I don't know what the behavior was or how it changed. If WDDX data is Stored in a DB and output using custom tags.. is there any internal CFMX implementation that would degrade performance compared to CF5.0? Well, custom tag invocations are faster in CFMX than in CF5. I have no idea about WDDX. Do you *think* it is slower? Have you written a test case and *proved* there is a noticeable difference? Why don't you try it for yourself. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Joe- I'll weigh in here and try to make it simple: Q: What is different in WDDX? A: Everything. Every slice, splice and piece of code. Completely and totally different. What is changed in the syntax? Not much. The question everyone wants to know is: What code are you running that you are saying is slower than CF5? Much like the current thread on the loading of the text file: What is the template you are running that is going slow? Engineering/Development here in-house cannot fix a bug we cannot define, or identify. Saying WDDX is slow does nothing. Saying WDDX translation given X and Y data is slow vs CF5 helps us more. This way, a bug can be entered, escalated and a patch can be generated. Jesse Noller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Macromedia Server Development Unix/Linux special guy -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:08 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? OK, that sounds like good progress so maybe we'll all stop ragging on you :) You havent given out any peformance tests.. other than MM Perf brief I am NOT sure...you guys have any performance test for the details we are talking about here...What can you expect from developers..? Well, it's apples and oranges... in CF5, WDDX2CFML was written in C/C++ and now it's completely rewritten in Java. It's just... different code. I' m not on the product team so I don't have access to the source. Repeated... no spec details given. This news was public.. in NEO/Beta releases. What would be good information is some like... (eg IIF scales differently in CFMX Vs CF5.0) SO the question is : Are there any changes/updates made to WDDX...in CFMX Vs CF5.0 (regardless of JAVA/C++ engine.. unicode)? that can possibly make it run slower (like the COM issue) yet Unknown(TESTING). Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 2:17 PM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 08:54 , Joe Eugene wrote: I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. OK, that sounds like good progress so maybe we'll all stop ragging on you :) Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. Hmm, interesting. That should be pretty easy to performance test. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Well, it's apples and oranges... in CF5, WDDX2CFML was written in C/C++ and now it's completely rewritten in Java. It's just... different code. I' m not on the product team so I don't have access to the source. Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. It's Unicode capable now - but that's just by virtue of it being implemented in Java. As far as I know, there were no specific behavioral changes (except what's in the release notes etc). Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 01:07 , Joe Eugene wrote: You havent given out any peformance tests.. other than MM Perf brief I am NOT sure...you guys have any performance test for the details we are talking about here...What can you expect from developers..? What? We're supposed to psychically guess what code you find is slower? Give me a break... Everyone here is waiting for you to actually show us a piece of code that you think is slower on CFMX. We've seen one script posted from someone else. Where's yours? I'm busy developing stuff on CFMX - it may have escaped your notice that I' m working on a Mac and therefore don't have pre-MX versions of ColdFusion to test stuff on. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Sorry, I no longer work for the companies in question, so I can't give exact details. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 1:14 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Can you give us some details? Is this performance equal in (CF 4.5, 5, and MX)? What software did you use for Load Testing? No of users? Machine? OS? Client Scope WDDX involved? Data store WDDX involved? Any performance results.. would be really appreciated. Joe - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 1:35 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? I have successfully been able to achieve great performance out of WDDX intensive applications using CF 4.5, 5, and MX. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 10:15 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Stace, No..Not Client Scope. That would be a real big problem..(client scope WDDX)... if all this turns out to be true(WDDX Serialize - Deserialize) performance in CFMX unless there is an optmized way(cfmx) to code WDDX. Yea.. WDDX in client scope is great... The App am dealing with...WDDX is written to the database for Content MGMT, i didnt code this.. am not sure.. why the developer used this method..The data is even redundant. Have you had a chance to LOAD TEST any Client Scope WDDX in CFMX..? Curious? Joe - Original Message - From: Stacy Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 12:10 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Hey Joe I'm curious...these objects...are they wddx packets stored in client scope which in turn is in your client variable datasource? Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:54 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Sean, I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. I will try to write case/result...end of this week or so. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. Thanks Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:00 AM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 07:26 , Joe Eugene wrote: Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences between CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX Er, yes, it was written in C/C++ in CF5 and it's been rewritten in Java in CFMX. As has everything else. Read my lips Joe: CFMX is a complete rewrite. What does #1 mean? I don't know. I don't use JavaScript with queries so I don't know what the behavior was or how it changed. If WDDX data is Stored in a DB and output using custom tags.. is there any internal CFMX implementation that would degrade performance compared to CF5.0? Well, custom tag invocations are faster in CFMX than in CF5. I have no idea about WDDX. Do you *think* it is slower? Have you written a test case and *proved* there is a noticeable difference? Why don't you try it for yourself. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
How about details on what you mean by... successfully been able to achieve great performance intensive applications On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Matt Liotta wrote: Sorry, I no longer work for the companies in question, so I can't give exact details. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 1:14 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Can you give us some details? Is this performance equal in (CF 4.5, 5, and MX)? What software did you use for Load Testing? No of users? Machine? OS? Client Scope WDDX involved? Data store WDDX involved? Any performance results.. would be really appreciated. Joe - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 1:35 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? I have successfully been able to achieve great performance out of WDDX intensive applications using CF 4.5, 5, and MX. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 10:15 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Stace, No..Not Client Scope. That would be a real big problem..(client scope WDDX)... if all this turns out to be true(WDDX Serialize - Deserialize) performance in CFMX unless there is an optmized way(cfmx) to code WDDX. Yea.. WDDX in client scope is great... The App am dealing with...WDDX is written to the database for Content MGMT, i didnt code this.. am not sure.. why the developer used this method..The data is even redundant. Have you had a chance to LOAD TEST any Client Scope WDDX in CFMX..? Curious? Joe - Original Message - From: Stacy Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 12:10 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Hey Joe I'm curious...these objects...are they wddx packets stored in client scope which in turn is in your client variable datasource? Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:54 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Sean, I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. I will try to write case/result...end of this week or so. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. Thanks Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:00 AM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 07:26 , Joe Eugene wrote: Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences between CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX Er, yes, it was written in C/C++ in CF5 and it's been rewritten in Java in CFMX. As has everything else. Read my lips Joe: CFMX is a complete rewrite. What does #1 mean? I don't know. I don't use JavaScript with queries so I don't know what the behavior was or how it changed. If WDDX data is Stored in a DB and output using custom tags.. is there any internal CFMX implementation that would degrade performance compared to CF5.0? Well, custom tag invocations are faster in CFMX than in CF5. I have no idea about WDDX. Do you *think* it is slower? Have you written a test case and *proved* there is a noticeable difference? Why don't you try it for yourself. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Sorry, I no longer work for the companies in question, so I can't give exact details. It doesn't have to be details about the work for the company itself. There seems to be a lot of factors in determining whether your application(s) ran with great performance (i.e. number of users, where you used WDDX, etc) and I'm curious as to how you gauge them. While I can see how someone would be able to write an application that uses WDDX better than someone else's app, I'm not sure how you determined that your app ran with great performace. In my understanding, there will always be overhead with WDDX because you have to serialize and deserialize. Can you also give some of your ideas on when someone should use WDDX, when not to, certain things to watch out for, etc? For myself, my favorite part about WDDX is being able to transfer data to Javascript easily. Beyond that, I haven't had _too_ much use for it. Ben Johnson __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
The use of WDDX was not a performance related one as obviously WDDX doesn't perform that well. We used WDDX as a way of marshalling data between the presentation and business tiers as well as marshalling data between CF and a variety of other programming languages. Quite simply, the use of WDDX was an architectural decision that had serious performance implications that we had to work around. Personally, I have always thought the WDDX Java library sucked and as such have maintained a private fork of the code. I don't know if the CFMX WDDX implementation makes use of the Java classes found at http://www.openwddx.org, but I certainly have need to modify those classes for my use. I am currently looking into using JAXB to replace the WDDX serializer and deserializer classes. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ben Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 2:05 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Sorry, I no longer work for the companies in question, so I can't give exact details. It doesn't have to be details about the work for the company itself. There seems to be a lot of factors in determining whether your application(s) ran with great performance (i.e. number of users, where you used WDDX, etc) and I'm curious as to how you gauge them. While I can see how someone would be able to write an application that uses WDDX better than someone else's app, I'm not sure how you determined that your app ran with great performace. In my understanding, there will always be overhead with WDDX because you have to serialize and deserialize. Can you also give some of your ideas on when someone should use WDDX, when not to, certain things to watch out for, etc? For myself, my favorite part about WDDX is being able to transfer data to Javascript easily. Beyond that, I haven't had _too_ much use for it. Ben Johnson __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
WDDX intensive applications: Applications that require serialization and deserialization of WDDX for every call to the middle-tier. Each web request required one or more calls to the middle-tier. Great performance: The applications were able to scale to meet the demand the users placed on them with only a couple of servers. These applications successfully handled 10-100 million page views per month. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Alex [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 1:57 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? How about details on what you mean by... successfully been able to achieve great performance intensive applications On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Matt Liotta wrote: Sorry, I no longer work for the companies in question, so I can't give exact details. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 1:14 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Can you give us some details? Is this performance equal in (CF 4.5, 5, and MX)? What software did you use for Load Testing? No of users? Machine? OS? Client Scope WDDX involved? Data store WDDX involved? Any performance results.. would be really appreciated. Joe - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 1:35 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? I have successfully been able to achieve great performance out of WDDX intensive applications using CF 4.5, 5, and MX. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 10:15 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Stace, No..Not Client Scope. That would be a real big problem..(client scope WDDX)... if all this turns out to be true(WDDX Serialize - Deserialize) performance in CFMX unless there is an optmized way(cfmx) to code WDDX. Yea.. WDDX in client scope is great... The App am dealing with...WDDX is written to the database for Content MGMT, i didnt code this.. am not sure.. why the developer used this method..The data is even redundant. Have you had a chance to LOAD TEST any Client Scope WDDX in CFMX..? Curious? Joe - Original Message - From: Stacy Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 12:10 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Hey Joe I'm curious...these objects...are they wddx packets stored in client scope which in turn is in your client variable datasource? Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:54 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Sean, I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. I will try to write case/result...end of this week or so. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. Thanks Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:00 AM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 07:26 , Joe Eugene wrote: Do you know of any internal WDDX implementation differences between CFMX and CF5.0 .. CFMX Er, yes, it was written in C/C++ in CF5 and it's been rewritten in Java in CFMX. As has everything else. Read my lips Joe: CFMX is a complete rewrite. What does #1 mean
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
I have successfully been able to achieve great performance out of WDDX intensive applications using CF 4.5, 5, and MX The below is opposite to your statement. The use of WDDX was not a performance related one as obviously WDDX doesn't perform that well. Joe - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 5:15 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? The use of WDDX was not a performance related one as obviously WDDX doesn't perform that well. We used WDDX as a way of marshalling data between the presentation and business tiers as well as marshalling data between CF and a variety of other programming languages. Quite simply, the use of WDDX was an architectural decision that had serious performance implications that we had to work around. Personally, I have always thought the WDDX Java library sucked and as such have maintained a private fork of the code. I don't know if the CFMX WDDX implementation makes use of the Java classes found at http://www.openwddx.org, but I certainly have need to modify those classes for my use. I am currently looking into using JAXB to replace the WDDX serializer and deserializer classes. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ben Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 2:05 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Sorry, I no longer work for the companies in question, so I can't give exact details. It doesn't have to be details about the work for the company itself. There seems to be a lot of factors in determining whether your application(s) ran with great performance (i.e. number of users, where you used WDDX, etc) and I'm curious as to how you gauge them. While I can see how someone would be able to write an application that uses WDDX better than someone else's app, I'm not sure how you determined that your app ran with great performace. In my understanding, there will always be overhead with WDDX because you have to serialize and deserialize. Can you also give some of your ideas on when someone should use WDDX, when not to, certain things to watch out for, etc? For myself, my favorite part about WDDX is being able to transfer data to Javascript easily. Beyond that, I haven't had _too_ much use for it. Ben Johnson __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Code Code Code I actually explained in detail what the code was doing...earlier 1.cfquery name=sQry ... returns... ID,Title,Subject,Body,Published date,Version,Published_by etc. 2.Now Serialize this and write it to database in ONE FIELD/COLUMN. 3.Create a dynamic page... that gets the content from the database. 4. Deserialize ie WDDX2CFML 5.Display the content... cfoutput#OutString.Title#/cfoutput 6.LOAD TEST with MS STRESS Tool/Load Runner or some else 30-50 users in CFMX...hitting the same pages for different Content.(Url?cid=10,Url?cid=12 .) 7.Do the same for CF5.0... Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:39 PM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 01:07 , Joe Eugene wrote: You havent given out any peformance tests.. other than MM Perf brief I am NOT sure...you guys have any performance test for the details we are talking about here...What can you expect from developers..? What? We're supposed to psychically guess what code you find is slower? Give me a break... Everyone here is waiting for you to actually show us a piece of code that you think is slower on CFMX. We've seen one script posted from someone else. Where's yours? I'm busy developing stuff on CFMX - it may have escaped your notice that I' m working on a Mac and therefore don't have pre-MX versions of ColdFusion to test stuff on. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Hey Joe... 3.Create a dynamic page... that gets the content from the database. You mean to tell me that you're writing out a file so that the file can retrieve more information from the db? Could you clarify this statement please? ~Todd __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Joe Eugene wrote: Code Code Code I actually explained in detail what the code was doing...earlier Code says more than an explanation. I submitted some code and within an hour several people reproduced the exact bug which has been filed with Macromedia (and I can go to bed). So far your thread is 4 days old and you are hardly nearer to a solution. Jochem __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
It's not opposite. WDDX has performance issues. However, I was able to work around those issues and create an application that performed great. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 3:30 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? I have successfully been able to achieve great performance out of WDDX intensive applications using CF 4.5, 5, and MX The below is opposite to your statement. The use of WDDX was not a performance related one as obviously WDDX doesn't perform that well. Joe - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 5:15 PM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? The use of WDDX was not a performance related one as obviously WDDX doesn't perform that well. We used WDDX as a way of marshalling data between the presentation and business tiers as well as marshalling data between CF and a variety of other programming languages. Quite simply, the use of WDDX was an architectural decision that had serious performance implications that we had to work around. Personally, I have always thought the WDDX Java library sucked and as such have maintained a private fork of the code. I don't know if the CFMX WDDX implementation makes use of the Java classes found at http://www.openwddx.org, but I certainly have need to modify those classes for my use. I am currently looking into using JAXB to replace the WDDX serializer and deserializer classes. Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ben Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 2:05 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Sorry, I no longer work for the companies in question, so I can't give exact details. It doesn't have to be details about the work for the company itself. There seems to be a lot of factors in determining whether your application(s) ran with great performance (i.e. number of users, where you used WDDX, etc) and I'm curious as to how you gauge them. While I can see how someone would be able to write an application that uses WDDX better than someone else's app, I'm not sure how you determined that your app ran with great performace. In my understanding, there will always be overhead with WDDX because you have to serialize and deserialize. Can you also give some of your ideas on when someone should use WDDX, when not to, certain things to watch out for, etc? For myself, my favorite part about WDDX is being able to transfer data to Javascript easily. Beyond that, I haven't had _too_ much use for it. Ben Johnson __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Code Code Code I actually explained in detail what the code was doing...earlier Well, you certainly didn't provide anything as clear as what you've provided here. Even here, you'd be better off posting the actual code, I think. So, yes, Code Code Code. If you want answers to programming questions, code is helpful. This is starting to remind me of Car Talk, the radio show in which people call up, and say that their car is making this noise or that noise, and the hosts try to guess what's wrong with it, but they really have no idea of course. You know, you may well be right about your suspicions of CF MX. However, you're really going about this the wrong way, I think. Instead of taking what appears to many to be a belligerent, uncommunicative attitude, you might be better served by taking a more cooperative approach, and providing more information about the specifics of your problem. There are plenty of people here who will be willing to help you out, if you do so. 1.cfquery name=sQry ... returns... ID,Title,Subject,Body,Published date,Version,Published_by etc. 2.Now Serialize this and write it to database in ONE FIELD/COLUMN. 3.Create a dynamic page... that gets the content from the database. 4. Deserialize ie WDDX2CFML 5.Display the content... cfoutput#OutString.Title#/cfoutput 6.LOAD TEST with MS STRESS Tool/Load Runner or some else 30-50 users in CFMX...hitting the same pages for different Content.(Url?cid=10,Url?cid=12 .) 7.Do the same for CF5.0... OK. Here's a possible plan for you. You've divided up your script into the above parts. You might wrap timers around each part, using GetTickCount, then output each part's elapsed time at the bottom of your page - a technique straight from CF Performance Tuning 101. Then, while running your app under your maximum test load - the maximum number of users that still returns a tolerable response, according to your response time ceiling - view the application with a browser and look at those values. Then, do the same for CF 5. Then, compare which parts were slower than which other parts, if any, or whether everything was proportionally slower. For example, you might find that the part that's much slower in CF MX is the WDDX2CFML part, or you might find it's your database query. Once you've found that, you can more easily create a reproducible test case, like Jochem did earlier. You can then post that, and others can verify your results. But if you just keep complaining that CF MX is slower, then you're unlikely to get any help with your real problem. This would be a shame for you, since you'd have wasted so much time, and it would be a shame for others, if there's a real problem to be found. Good luck! Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Great Response was RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Dave, this is such a helpful reply for anyone looking to apply Performance Tuning to ColdFusion apps. I know you neither asked for nor indeed need my endorsement but I just wanted to amplify to others the worth of your response, having gone through these exercises many, many times myself. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt, CTO Webapper http://www.webapper.com Downey CA Office 562.243.6255 AIM - webappermb Webapper - Making the NET work -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 6:07 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Code Code Code I actually explained in detail what the code was doing...earlier Well, you certainly didn't provide anything as clear as what you've provided here. Even here, you'd be better off posting the actual code, I think. So, yes, Code Code Code. If you want answers to programming questions, code is helpful. This is starting to remind me of Car Talk, the radio show in which people call up, and say that their car is making this noise or that noise, and the hosts try to guess what's wrong with it, but they really have no idea of course. You know, you may well be right about your suspicions of CF MX. However, you're really going about this the wrong way, I think. Instead of taking what appears to many to be a belligerent, uncommunicative attitude, you might be better served by taking a more cooperative approach, and providing more information about the specifics of your problem. There are plenty of people here who will be willing to help you out, if you do so. 1.cfquery name=sQry ... returns... ID,Title,Subject,Body,Published date,Version,Published_by etc. 2.Now Serialize this and write it to database in ONE FIELD/COLUMN. 3.Create a dynamic page... that gets the content from the database. 4. Deserialize ie WDDX2CFML 5.Display the content... cfoutput#OutString.Title#/cfoutput 6.LOAD TEST with MS STRESS Tool/Load Runner or some else 30-50 users in CFMX...hitting the same pages for different Content.(Url?cid=10,Url?cid=12 .) 7.Do the same for CF5.0... OK. Here's a possible plan for you. You've divided up your script into the above parts. You might wrap timers around each part, using GetTickCount, then output each part's elapsed time at the bottom of your page - a technique straight from CF Performance Tuning 101. Then, while running your app under your maximum test load - the maximum number of users that still returns a tolerable response, according to your response time ceiling - view the application with a browser and look at those values. Then, do the same for CF 5. Then, compare which parts were slower than which other parts, if any, or whether everything was proportionally slower. For example, you might find that the part that's much slower in CF MX is the WDDX2CFML part, or you might find it's your database query. Once you've found that, you can more easily create a reproducible test case, like Jochem did earlier. You can then post that, and others can verify your results. But if you just keep complaining that CF MX is slower, then you're unlikely to get any help with your real problem. This would be a shame for you, since you'd have wasted so much time, and it would be a shame for others, if there's a real problem to be found. Good luck! Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Dave, If i had the time to break code and write test cases and docs on WDDX ...CFMX.. i would have done so... have to work...on development like everybody else on this list.. and then do testing on my spare time I was hoping some MM folks would know something on internals... that was the original reason.. to the post.. or if another developer personally did some test... I am not complaining...WRONG... the questions were pretty clear. DOES ANYONE KNOW INTERNALS OF WDDX in CFMX? ANSWER:NO So i am back on my track to test.. breaking code into pieces. I dont think any responsible developer would provide their Prod Code... Code will follow for the anxious Joe -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 9:07 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Code Code Code I actually explained in detail what the code was doing...earlier Well, you certainly didn't provide anything as clear as what you've provided here. Even here, you'd be better off posting the actual code, I think. So, yes, Code Code Code. If you want answers to programming questions, code is helpful. This is starting to remind me of Car Talk, the radio show in which people call up, and say that their car is making this noise or that noise, and the hosts try to guess what's wrong with it, but they really have no idea of course. You know, you may well be right about your suspicions of CF MX. However, you're really going about this the wrong way, I think. Instead of taking what appears to many to be a belligerent, uncommunicative attitude, you might be better served by taking a more cooperative approach, and providing more information about the specifics of your problem. There are plenty of people here who will be willing to help you out, if you do so. 1.cfquery name=sQry ... returns... ID,Title,Subject,Body,Published date,Version,Published_by etc. 2.Now Serialize this and write it to database in ONE FIELD/COLUMN. 3.Create a dynamic page... that gets the content from the database. 4. Deserialize ie WDDX2CFML 5.Display the content... cfoutput#OutString.Title#/cfoutput 6.LOAD TEST with MS STRESS Tool/Load Runner or some else 30-50 users in CFMX...hitting the same pages for different Content.(Url?cid=10,Url?cid=12 .) 7.Do the same for CF5.0... OK. Here's a possible plan for you. You've divided up your script into the above parts. You might wrap timers around each part, using GetTickCount, then output each part's elapsed time at the bottom of your page - a technique straight from CF Performance Tuning 101. Then, while running your app under your maximum test load - the maximum number of users that still returns a tolerable response, according to your response time ceiling - view the application with a browser and look at those values. Then, do the same for CF 5. Then, compare which parts were slower than which other parts, if any, or whether everything was proportionally slower. For example, you might find that the part that's much slower in CF MX is the WDDX2CFML part, or you might find it's your database query. Once you've found that, you can more easily create a reproducible test case, like Jochem did earlier. You can then post that, and others can verify your results. But if you just keep complaining that CF MX is slower, then you're unlikely to get any help with your real problem. This would be a shame for you, since you'd have wasted so much time, and it would be a shame for others, if there's a real problem to be found. Good luck! Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
If i had the time to break code and write test cases and docs on WDDX ...CFMX.. i would have done so... have to work...on development like everybody else on this list.. and then do testing on my spare time I was hoping some MM folks would know something on internals... that was the original reason.. to the post.. or if another developer personally did some test... I am not complaining...WRONG... the questions were pretty clear. DOES ANYONE KNOW INTERNALS OF WDDX in CFMX? ANSWER:NO So i am back on my track to test.. breaking code into pieces. I dont think any responsible developer would provide their Prod Code... Code will follow for the anxious A four-point response: 1. You could've broken the code into sections in the time that it took you to post this message. I mean, seven sections of code, we're talking about twenty lines of cut-n-paste code you'd have to add - two lines around each section, one additional line per section for output. Running one more load test would take, well, as much time as it's taken you to run previous load tests. 2. Maybe it's just me, but your posts don't seem to clearly state your questions in the way that you say they do. 3. Plenty of people post Prod Code on this list, every day. There's very little stuff in one CF program that hasn't been written thousands of times over in other CF programs. If you need to sanitize the code to remove specific portions, that's fine. However, you haven't posted any code at all - you haven't even posted pseudocode, really. 4. I don't think anyone's especially anxious to see your code. And, in closing, I think you misunderstood the point of my response; it wasn't to discuss how you're not playing well with others, or anything like that. Instead, it was an attempt to give you what I thought was the shortest path out of your current problem situation. You're free to use it, or not. You can continue waiting for some deep throat at Macromedia to say, yes, there's a secret problem with line 55 of the CF MX module which handles WDDX serialization on Windows platforms on Tuesdays during a full moon. Good luck, though, with whichever path you choose. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Thanks for your HELP TIME Dave! -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:35 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? If i had the time to break code and write test cases and docs on WDDX ...CFMX.. i would have done so... have to work...on development like everybody else on this list.. and then do testing on my spare time I was hoping some MM folks would know something on internals... that was the original reason.. to the post.. or if another developer personally did some test... I am not complaining...WRONG... the questions were pretty clear. DOES ANYONE KNOW INTERNALS OF WDDX in CFMX? ANSWER:NO So i am back on my track to test.. breaking code into pieces. I dont think any responsible developer would provide their Prod Code... Code will follow for the anxious A four-point response: 1. You could've broken the code into sections in the time that it took you to post this message. I mean, seven sections of code, we're talking about twenty lines of cut-n-paste code you'd have to add - two lines around each section, one additional line per section for output. Running one more load test would take, well, as much time as it's taken you to run previous load tests. 2. Maybe it's just me, but your posts don't seem to clearly state your questions in the way that you say they do. 3. Plenty of people post Prod Code on this list, every day. There's very little stuff in one CF program that hasn't been written thousands of times over in other CF programs. If you need to sanitize the code to remove specific portions, that's fine. However, you haven't posted any code at all - you haven't even posted pseudocode, really. 4. I don't think anyone's especially anxious to see your code. And, in closing, I think you misunderstood the point of my response; it wasn't to discuss how you're not playing well with others, or anything like that. Instead, it was an attempt to give you what I thought was the shortest path out of your current problem situation. You're free to use it, or not. You can continue waiting for some deep throat at Macromedia to say, yes, there's a secret problem with line 55 of the CF MX module which handles WDDX serialization on Windows platforms on Tuesdays during a full moon. Good luck, though, with whichever path you choose. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
t --- -Original Message- From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:17 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe- I'll weigh in here and try to make it simple: Q: What is different in WDDX? A: Everything. Every slice, splice and piece of code. Completely and totally different. What is changed in the syntax? Not much. The question everyone wants to know is: What code are you running that you are saying is slower than CF5? Much like the current thread on the loading of the text file: What is the template you are running that is going slow? Engineering/Development here in-house cannot fix a bug we cannot define, or identify. Saying WDDX is slow does nothing. Saying WDDX translation given X and Y data is slow vs CF5 helps us more. This way, a bug can be entered, escalated and a patch can be generated. Jesse Noller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Macromedia Server Development Unix/Linux special guy -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:08 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? OK, that sounds like good progress so maybe we'll all stop ragging on you :) You havent given out any peformance tests.. other than MM Perf brief I am NOT sure...you guys have any performance test for the details we are talking about here...What can you expect from developers..? Well, it's apples and oranges... in CF5, WDDX2CFML was written in C/C++ and now it's completely rewritten in Java. It's just... different code. I' m not on the product team so I don't have access to the source. Repeated... no spec details given. This news was public.. in NEO/Beta releases. What would be good information is some like... (eg IIF scales differently in CFMX Vs CF5.0) SO the question is : Are there any changes/updates made to WDDX...in CFMX Vs CF5.0 (regardless of JAVA/C++ engine.. unicode)? that can possibly make it run slower (like the COM issue) yet Unknown(TESTING). Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 2:17 PM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 08:54 , Joe Eugene wrote: I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. OK, that sounds like good progress so maybe we'll all stop ragging on you :) Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. Hmm, interesting. That should be pretty easy to performance test. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Well, it's apples and oranges... in CF5, WDDX2CFML was written in C/C++ and now it's completely rewritten in Java. It's just... different code. I' m not on the product team so I don't have access to the source. Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. It's Unicode capable now - but that's just by virtue of it being implemented in Java. As far as I know, there were no specific behavioral changes (except what's in the release notes etc). Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
='UPLOADPDF'stringP1903.pdf/string/varvar name='USERNAME'stringabc/varvar name='VERSIONNUMBER'number42/number/varvar name='VERSIONSTATUSID'stringPUB/string/var/struct/data/wddxPacke t --- -Original Message- From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:17 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe- I'll weigh in here and try to make it simple: Q: What is different in WDDX? A: Everything. Every slice, splice and piece of code. Completely and totally different. What is changed in the syntax? Not much. The question everyone wants to know is: What code are you running that you are saying is slower than CF5? Much like the current thread on the loading of the text file: What is the template you are running that is going slow? Engineering/Development here in-house cannot fix a bug we cannot define, or identify. Saying WDDX is slow does nothing. Saying WDDX translation given X and Y data is slow vs CF5 helps us more. This way, a bug can be entered, escalated and a patch can be generated. Jesse Noller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Macromedia Server Development Unix/Linux special guy -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:08 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? OK, that sounds like good progress so maybe we'll all stop ragging on you :) You havent given out any peformance tests.. other than MM Perf brief I am NOT sure...you guys have any performance test for the details we are talking about here...What can you expect from developers..? Well, it's apples and oranges... in CF5, WDDX2CFML was written in C/C++ and now it's completely rewritten in Java. It's just... different code. I' m not on the product team so I don't have access to the source. Repeated... no spec details given. This news was public.. in NEO/Beta releases. What would be good information is some like... (eg IIF scales differently in CFMX Vs CF5.0) SO the question is : Are there any changes/updates made to WDDX...in CFMX Vs CF5.0 (regardless of JAVA/C++ engine.. unicode)? that can possibly make it run slower (like the COM issue) yet Unknown(TESTING). Joe - Original Message - From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 2:17 PM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 08:54 , Joe Eugene wrote: I havent come to a final test result.. but i think we are narrowing it down to the Complex Object(WDDX) returned from the data store that gets parsed out WDDX2CFML.. OK, that sounds like good progress so maybe we'll all stop ragging on you :) Custom Tags are probably running ok/fast.. probably its the WDDX parsing..in CFMX that causes the CPU to run 80-90%... Atleast we are seeing a pattern here with tests. Hmm, interesting. That should be pretty easy to performance test. Is it possible that you can find out.. How the Java Implementation of WDDX2CFML has changed in CFMX? Well, it's apples and oranges... in CF5, WDDX2CFML was written in C/C++ and now it's completely rewritten in Java. It's just... different code. I' m not on the product team so I don't have access to the source. Any WDDX implementation changes(Not in docs) will be helpful. It's Unicode capable now - but that's just by virtue of it being implemented in Java. As far as I know, there were no specific behavioral changes (except what's in the release notes etc). Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
// Pass the structure back to the caller x = Evaluate(caller.#Attributes.ReturnStruct# = strTemp); You could start by removing this evaluate (it shouldn't matter that much, but should make it faster if written as: cfset caller.#Attributes.ReturnStruct#=strTemp Jesse __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
Noticed the evaluate as well but thats very minor.. right? 10ms maybe? Joe -Original Message- From: Jesse Houwing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 1:45 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE) // Pass the structure back to the caller x = Evaluate(caller.#Attributes.ReturnStruct# = strTemp); You could start by removing this evaluate (it shouldn't matter that much, but should make it faster if written as: cfset caller.#Attributes.ReturnStruct#=strTemp Jesse __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? (CODE)
On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 10:27 , Joe Eugene wrote: Below are the details of the code that is running slow on CFMX. Thank you for (finally) posting some example code and data that we can try out. I'll try to have a look at this tomorrow (although, as I say, I don't have CF5 to test against). I expect other folks here will now try out your WDDX packet on both systems and see what happens. I'd still recommend you actually put some getTickCount() calls around the code and report back the times on both CF5 and CFMX - as several people have (repeatedly) said here, the response time is really more important than the CPU usage. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Joe, After reading your recent slew of posts, I feel compelled to speak up (as others already have) for the majority of CFMX users on this list that are doing just fine with the product. Sure, some things are running slower (COM for sure) and waiting for page compilations on _development_ boxes is a slight nuisance. But in the overall scheme of things, most of us are doing just fine with CFMX and we're finding similar results with our production applications as Macromedia did with their tests (read the performance brief: http://www.macromedia.com/software/coldfusion/whitepapers/pdf/cfmx_perfo rmance_brief.pdf). For what is basically a 1.0 release, it's pretty damn good. I believe this is where Sean and others are coming from on this. We're not having your type of trouble with our code (I should note here that I'm not paying attention to CPU usage. Rather I'm monitoring response times and throughput which matter more to the end user's experience). So this leads us to the question that Sean has been asking all along, what are YOU doing in YOUR tests? The more information you can provide about your specific situation the better. Response times and code samples would be the best place to start. Have you run your app. with debugging turned on? If so, what pages are bottlenecking the application? Can we get some code samples from those? There are many of us that would like to help in this situation, but I have to agree with Sean, the lack of details on your behalf is making it rather difficult. If you really want to get to the root of your issues, give us a something more to go on. Chris Kief -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 10:46 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Sunday, July 28, 2002, at 09:06 , Joe Eugene wrote: If you have personally done some convincing TESTS ... we would be happy to know your TEST results. While I ran CF5 and CFMX (pre-release) on the same Win2K system, my experience was that CFMX was faster (once the templates had been compiled on the first pass). CPU usage is higher with CFMX while it is compiling (obviously) but I'm not sure that the overall average CPU usage was higher with CFMX. As I said, I don't believe 100% CPU usage is a problem per se. I am NOT asking you to comment on what I SAY/DO/TEST/CODE... rather YOUR TEST results... But I am very interested in the *code* of your tests - I want to know what the response times are with your code (something you haven't told us). If you have none...why dont you tune yourself out of this THREAD. Perhaps if you were less unpleasant about this whole matter people would be more co-operative with you? I'm trying really hard to help you here but you haven't produced anything concrete for folks to work with. You've just been nasty and pointed fingers all around - while other people are quite clearly not having the same problems that you believe you are seeing. Stop raising your voice and show us the code and the response times. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Joe. Please track down the portion of your app that causes the CPU spike and post the code. Then I'm sure plenty of folks will have ideas on how to optimize. Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 11:25 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? This is really funny over and over.. no facts/proofs of test by anybody I would really be exited and happy to know that CFMX Scales... If i can see some facts/proofs. Joe -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 11:05 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Sunday, July 28, 2002, at 05:57 , Joe Eugene wrote: I am having a hard time.. conveying the messsage.. Yes, so it seems :) We are talking about basic code in ColdFusion.. every answer i get is like.. Custom Tags..(oh for CFMX u need to do this.. or this is how you can Optimize.. for CFMX...CFC .. function blah blah) That's because you are not being specific about what code you are testing that is running slower. Show us your code! Nobody has said.. alright.. if you code CFLOOP this way in CF5.0 you can speed it up writing CFLOOP like THIS(.) in CFMX. Because the code fragment you posted did not seem to be real code (a simple cfloop that created an impossibly long string). No one has suggested that such basic constructs need rewriting in CFMX. Custom tag invocation is definitely faster - several people here have testified to that. ARE YOU GUYS SAYING THAT CFMX is 10% FASTER THAN CF5.0? If so.. What were the TESTS you did to prove this? READ THE PERFORMANCE BRIEF! As Todd (I think?) said, people are beginning to tune you out because you are not providing any facts. Try to be specific. Show us code that you've tested that is slower on CFMX and then we can see why that is. NOTE: Sean... i read quite a lot from here and there.. its awfully.. hard for me to write down who the author,published date.. etc everytime i read something. Why is it hard? You read something, you make a note of the article. C'mon Joe, you're whining a lot but you're not backing it up with details. . If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Stace, I think we've been trying to tell him that since the beginning and he's yet to do such. He's one of those guys that would rather sit and complain than actually tracking down the problem. I think everyone on the list that has confronted Joe has been more than helpful (except Joe, of course), especially Sean. Sean's a busy guy and to get ... 5-6 responses from him on a single topic, those better be damn good questions imho. ;) (sigh... all those wasted keystrokes! ;) ehhehehe) ~Todd p.s.: Sean C., yes, I'm the one that say tune out... nanananananananananananananan On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, Stacy Young wrote: Joe. Please track down the portion of your app that causes the CPU spike and post the code. Then I'm sure plenty of folks will have ideas on how to optimize. Stace -- Todd Rafferty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - http://www.web-rat.com/ | Team Macromedia Volunteer for ColdFusion | http://www.macromedia.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/ | http://www.flashCFM.com/ - webRat (Moderator)| http://www.ultrashock.com/ - webRat (Back-end Moderator) | __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
I will admit that I think that our organization has codeing issues :) I am trying to show this and get past it, but the code analyzer blows up before it get very far. I run it and it churns for about 2 minutes maybe and then returns an error in one of its templates with a wddx error. I really want to try this tool out! Any suggestios ? Thanks, Mike -Original Message- From: Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 9:12 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe you're not using the fusebox methodology by any chance are you? Personally I'd love to see Joe submit this code for the app so we can break it apart for him and show him why it's not scaling well. I think it's time for those people that have CFMX running take a stand and say, Gee, well.. I've been running it for over 2 months and ... whew... does it fly. Every situation is unique I realize, but this is not rocket science here and no one will ever admit that the fault just might lie in their code. It's very easy to stand up and start swearing and place the blame and it's always time consuming to get to the root of the problem and swearing and placing the blame isn't going to get you there any faster... Has anyone on the list thought about creating a peer review mailing list? I realize that not everyone can sit and stare at code (we all have our own stuff to do), I myself would be curious about being reviewed by my peer to see if I'm on the right track. ~Todd At 09:53 AM 7/27/2002 -0400, you wrote: Is the app large? Are you able to break the test down to just portions at a time? Long shot but perhaps there's a particular operation taking place that causes the memory spike. Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 2:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Alright guys.. i have tried almost what everybody generally knows to CFMX perfomance.. COM, Trusted Cache, Caching template size, Compile takes time etc... Is there anything else that has NOT been brought up? (MM Docs suck) This is really pityfull... CFMX! might do some EXTRA stuff.. but if it cant scale...atleast close to CF5.0... Why buy DAMN CFMX Sorry on my language.. but this is really frustrating! Joe -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 8:41 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? No we are not using any COM objects. Joe -Original Message- From: Jesse Houwing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 6:38 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe Eugene wrote: None of the below have IMPROVED Performance. 1. Trusted Cache (Enabled) 2. Increased Template Cache Size (decrease Cache pops) 3. Decreased Consecutive Request to 5 4. Restarted CF APP Service serveral times after setting changes. NONE of these have done any good so far. That's weird. Are you using COM objects? Those have had a severe slowdown in MX. If you are using COM, try replacing them with java or cfc's if possible. Otherwise generate stub's for them (that should speedup COM objects quite a bit). Jesse Todd Rafferty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.web-rat.com/ Team Macromedia Volunteer for ColdFusion http://www.macromedia.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/ Moderator @ FlashCFM.com - http://www.flashCFM.com/ Back-end Moderator @ Ultrashock.com - http://www.ultrashock.com/ __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Stacy, I am still in the process of Load Testing different sections of the Content App... I suspect.. Its something to do with (Wddx datastore,Custom tags etc) We didnt write this code...and i dont advice the method the app was written. I will post some Code/Results .. when i find out something. Maybe Wddx is implemented different in CFMXdont know. Think there were 2-3 Wddx options added in CFMX. In the mean time.. if you have time to test.. you can try MS Web Load Testing tool. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/itsolutio ns/intranet/downloads/webstres.asp?frame=true Optimizing code should be fairly easy.. once we can find the problem. Thanks Joe - Original Message - From: Stacy Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 7:10 AM Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe. Please track down the portion of your app that causes the CPU spike and post the code. Then I'm sure plenty of folks will have ideas on how to optimize. Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 11:25 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? This is really funny over and over.. no facts/proofs of test by anybody I would really be exited and happy to know that CFMX Scales... If i can see some facts/proofs. Joe -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 11:05 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Sunday, July 28, 2002, at 05:57 , Joe Eugene wrote: I am having a hard time.. conveying the messsage.. Yes, so it seems :) We are talking about basic code in ColdFusion.. every answer i get is like.. Custom Tags..(oh for CFMX u need to do this.. or this is how you can Optimize.. for CFMX...CFC .. function blah blah) That's because you are not being specific about what code you are testing that is running slower. Show us your code! Nobody has said.. alright.. if you code CFLOOP this way in CF5.0 you can speed it up writing CFLOOP like THIS(.) in CFMX. Because the code fragment you posted did not seem to be real code (a simple cfloop that created an impossibly long string). No one has suggested that such basic constructs need rewriting in CFMX. Custom tag invocation is definitely faster - several people here have testified to that. ARE YOU GUYS SAYING THAT CFMX is 10% FASTER THAN CF5.0? If so.. What were the TESTS you did to prove this? READ THE PERFORMANCE BRIEF! As Todd (I think?) said, people are beginning to tune you out because you are not providing any facts. Try to be specific. Show us code that you've tested that is slower on CFMX and then we can see why that is. NOTE: Sean... i read quite a lot from here and there.. its awfully.. hard for me to write down who the author,published date.. etc everytime i read something. Why is it hard? You read something, you make a note of the article. C'mon Joe, you're whining a lot but you're not backing it up with details. . If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Chris, MM's performance brief is probably based on optimized CFMX code and maybe optimized CF.50 code. How do you think this is going to help any of us.. unless the docs say.. Change all your code to get THIS performance. Have you personally done any LOAD Testing with your CF5.0 code (run on CFMX) that uses almost all the features of CF5.0? WDDX? Functions? Graphs(of Course deprecated)? CFSCRIPT? The problems reported so far.. has been the results of Tests done by different users. We are still testing.. hope will find out something. Joe -Original Message- From: Chris Kief [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 2:59 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe, After reading your recent slew of posts, I feel compelled to speak up (as others already have) for the majority of CFMX users on this list that are doing just fine with the product. Sure, some things are running slower (COM for sure) and waiting for page compilations on _development_ boxes is a slight nuisance. But in the overall scheme of things, most of us are doing just fine with CFMX and we're finding similar results with our production applications as Macromedia did with their tests (read the performance brief: http://www.macromedia.com/software/coldfusion/whitepapers/pdf/cfmx_perfo rmance_brief.pdf). For what is basically a 1.0 release, it's pretty damn good. I believe this is where Sean and others are coming from on this. We're not having your type of trouble with our code (I should note here that I'm not paying attention to CPU usage. Rather I'm monitoring response times and throughput which matter more to the end user's experience). So this leads us to the question that Sean has been asking all along, what are YOU doing in YOUR tests? The more information you can provide about your specific situation the better. Response times and code samples would be the best place to start. Have you run your app. with debugging turned on? If so, what pages are bottlenecking the application? Can we get some code samples from those? There are many of us that would like to help in this situation, but I have to agree with Sean, the lack of details on your behalf is making it rather difficult. If you really want to get to the root of your issues, give us a something more to go on. Chris Kief -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 10:46 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Sunday, July 28, 2002, at 09:06 , Joe Eugene wrote: If you have personally done some convincing TESTS ... we would be happy to know your TEST results. While I ran CF5 and CFMX (pre-release) on the same Win2K system, my experience was that CFMX was faster (once the templates had been compiled on the first pass). CPU usage is higher with CFMX while it is compiling (obviously) but I'm not sure that the overall average CPU usage was higher with CFMX. As I said, I don't believe 100% CPU usage is a problem per se. I am NOT asking you to comment on what I SAY/DO/TEST/CODE... rather YOUR TEST results... But I am very interested in the *code* of your tests - I want to know what the response times are with your code (something you haven't told us). If you have none...why dont you tune yourself out of this THREAD. Perhaps if you were less unpleasant about this whole matter people would be more co-operative with you? I'm trying really hard to help you here but you haven't produced anything concrete for folks to work with. You've just been nasty and pointed fingers all around - while other people are quite clearly not having the same problems that you believe you are seeing. Stop raising your voice and show us the code and the response times. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
At 10:31 PM 7/29/2002 -0400, Joe (again) wrote: Have you personally done any LOAD Testing with your CF5.0 code (run on CFMX) that uses almost all the features of CF5.0? WDDX? Functions? Graphs(of Course deprecated)? CFSCRIPT? Why are Graphs deprecated...? ~Todd __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Fwd: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Nevermind, I see.. CFGRAPH is now CFCHART ... (oh no!) ~Todd Why are Graphs deprecated...? ~Todd __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Exactly Todd.CFGRAPH will still work.. but looks funny. Isnt this why we are all spending time testing..??? Joe -Original Message- From: Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 10:56 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Fwd: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Nevermind, I see.. CFGRAPH is now CFCHART ... (oh no!) ~Todd Why are Graphs deprecated...? ~Todd __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
MM's performance brief is probably based on optimized CFMX code and maybe optimized CF.50 code. How do you think this is going to help any of us.. unless the docs say.. Change all your code to get THIS performance. Have you personally done any LOAD Testing with your CF5.0 code (run on CFMX) that uses almost all the features of CF5.0? WDDX? Functions? Graphs(of Course deprecated)? CFSCRIPT? The problems reported so far.. has been the results of Tests done by different users. We are still testing.. hope will find out something. OK. At this point, you seem to be doing load testing, right? Rather than worry about the MM performance brief, or looking for nonexistent CF MX-specific tuning hints, I'd recommend that you use your load testing to find out the specific things that are slow within your application. If you want, you could then compare those bottlenecks to the ones you had in CF 5, but that's not necessary. Then, see if you can identify the CF MX bottlenecks, let people know what they are, and look for solutions to those specific problems. It won't do any good for you to just say I'm load testing, and it's slower - you have to find the specific things that are slower (which is part of a typical performance tuning load test procedure). Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Monday, July 29, 2002, at 07:31 , Joe Eugene wrote: MM's performance brief is probably based on optimized CFMX code and maybe optimized CF.50 code. Nope. As far as I know it's the exact same code run on both CF5 and CFMX. I will ask the QA lab to confirm this. If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
I am having a hard time.. conveying the messsage.. We are talking about basic code in ColdFusion.. every answer i get is like.. Custom Tags..(oh for CFMX u need to do this.. or this is how you can Optimize.. for CFMX...CFC .. function blah blah) Nobody has said.. alright.. if you code CFLOOP this way in CF5.0 you can speed it up writing CFLOOP like THIS(.) in CFMX. So basically are we all on the path BASICS of CF (CFQUERY,CFLOOP) doesnt need optimization.. so if thats the theory... ARE YOU GUYS SAYING THAT CFMX is 10% FASTER THAN CF5.0? If so.. What were the TESTS you did to prove this? Joe NOTE: Sean... i read quite a lot from here and there.. its awfully.. hard for me to write down who the author,published date.. etc everytime i read something. -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 11:39 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Saturday, July 27, 2002, at 01:58 , Joe Eugene wrote: eg i saw a statment like cfset x=hello/ MM docs.. dont imply / anywhere.. so where / come from? it doesnt break the code.. so is this optimized CMFX? Where did you see that statement? You need to start being a bit more specific about things and then you'll get more helpful answers. Maybe you saw code like that in the Coding Guidelines I published? Yes, we are trying to require XHTML-compliant generated pages so it's more consistent to have XHTML-compliant CFML source code. There's no magic here. Nothing to do with CFMX. In fact, requiring the closing / in tag invocations means that our developers have to be more defensive when they write custom tags because of the start/end executionMode thing (see my recent blog entry for more details). If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Sunday, July 28, 2002, at 05:57 , Joe Eugene wrote: I am having a hard time.. conveying the messsage.. Yes, so it seems :) We are talking about basic code in ColdFusion.. every answer i get is like.. Custom Tags..(oh for CFMX u need to do this.. or this is how you can Optimize.. for CFMX...CFC .. function blah blah) That's because you are not being specific about what code you are testing that is running slower. Show us your code! Nobody has said.. alright.. if you code CFLOOP this way in CF5.0 you can speed it up writing CFLOOP like THIS(.) in CFMX. Because the code fragment you posted did not seem to be real code (a simple cfloop that created an impossibly long string). No one has suggested that such basic constructs need rewriting in CFMX. Custom tag invocation is definitely faster - several people here have testified to that. ARE YOU GUYS SAYING THAT CFMX is 10% FASTER THAN CF5.0? If so.. What were the TESTS you did to prove this? READ THE PERFORMANCE BRIEF! As Todd (I think?) said, people are beginning to tune you out because you are not providing any facts. Try to be specific. Show us code that you've tested that is slower on CFMX and then we can see why that is. NOTE: Sean... i read quite a lot from here and there.. its awfully.. hard for me to write down who the author,published date.. etc everytime i read something. Why is it hard? You read something, you make a note of the article. C'mon Joe, you're whining a lot but you're not backing it up with details. . If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
This is really funny over and over.. no facts/proofs of test by anybody I would really be exited and happy to know that CFMX Scales... If i can see some facts/proofs. Joe -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 11:05 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Sunday, July 28, 2002, at 05:57 , Joe Eugene wrote: I am having a hard time.. conveying the messsage.. Yes, so it seems :) We are talking about basic code in ColdFusion.. every answer i get is like.. Custom Tags..(oh for CFMX u need to do this.. or this is how you can Optimize.. for CFMX...CFC .. function blah blah) That's because you are not being specific about what code you are testing that is running slower. Show us your code! Nobody has said.. alright.. if you code CFLOOP this way in CF5.0 you can speed it up writing CFLOOP like THIS(.) in CFMX. Because the code fragment you posted did not seem to be real code (a simple cfloop that created an impossibly long string). No one has suggested that such basic constructs need rewriting in CFMX. Custom tag invocation is definitely faster - several people here have testified to that. ARE YOU GUYS SAYING THAT CFMX is 10% FASTER THAN CF5.0? If so.. What were the TESTS you did to prove this? READ THE PERFORMANCE BRIEF! As Todd (I think?) said, people are beginning to tune you out because you are not providing any facts. Try to be specific. Show us code that you've tested that is slower on CFMX and then we can see why that is. NOTE: Sean... i read quite a lot from here and there.. its awfully.. hard for me to write down who the author,published date.. etc everytime i read something. Why is it hard? You read something, you make a note of the article. C'mon Joe, you're whining a lot but you're not backing it up with details. . If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Sunday, July 28, 2002, at 08:24 , Joe Eugene wrote: This is really funny over and over.. no facts/proofs of test by anybody We're still waiting for you to furnish your facts and proof Joe... I would really be exited and happy to know that CFMX Scales... If i can see some facts/proofs. Read the performance brief and take your issues up with Damon Cooper. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Sean, The purpose of this thread is NOT for us to comment on your ATTITUDE... If you have a problem with the Thread and are NOT interested.. why even follow it??? Otherwise If you have personally done some convincing TESTS ... we would be happy to know your TEST results. I am NOT asking you to comment on what I SAY/DO/TEST/CODE... rather YOUR TEST results... If you have none...why dont you tune yourself out of this THREAD. Joe -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 11:29 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Sunday, July 28, 2002, at 08:24 , Joe Eugene wrote: This is really funny over and over.. no facts/proofs of test by anybody We're still waiting for you to furnish your facts and proof Joe... I would really be exited and happy to know that CFMX Scales... If i can see some facts/proofs. Read the performance brief and take your issues up with Damon Cooper. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Original Topic of the Thread. Windows 2000 boxes for same CONTENT.. Testing done with MICROSOFT WEB APPLICATION STRESS TOOL JRun.exe is whats taking all the CPU on CFMX box Simulated 50 concurrent users on CFMX = average 85% CPU on 750Mhz DUAL P3 Processor Simulated 50 concurrent users on CF5.0 = average 12% CPU on 600Mhz Single P3 Processor YES:maybe 3 Custom Tags,WDDX,Queries,Basic CF stuff NO:CFX,COM,CORBA,Sessions/Client vars etc Has anybody had the opportunity to do scale tests and have seen the above Results.. if so... Do you know what is causing this? Saw some posts saying 100% CPU utilization is OK!!!. I am interested in finding out what is causing this.. since the only change was CF code run on CFMX Vs CF5.0 Thanks Joe __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Sunday, July 28, 2002, at 09:06 , Joe Eugene wrote: If you have personally done some convincing TESTS ... we would be happy to know your TEST results. While I ran CF5 and CFMX (pre-release) on the same Win2K system, my experience was that CFMX was faster (once the templates had been compiled on the first pass). CPU usage is higher with CFMX while it is compiling (obviously) but I'm not sure that the overall average CPU usage was higher with CFMX. As I said, I don't believe 100% CPU usage is a problem per se. I am NOT asking you to comment on what I SAY/DO/TEST/CODE... rather YOUR TEST results... But I am very interested in the *code* of your tests - I want to know what the response times are with your code (something you haven't told us). If you have none...why dont you tune yourself out of this THREAD. Perhaps if you were less unpleasant about this whole matter people would be more co-operative with you? I'm trying really hard to help you here but you haven't produced anything concrete for folks to work with. You've just been nasty and pointed fingers all around - while other people are quite clearly not having the same problems that you believe you are seeing. Stop raising your voice and show us the code and the response times. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Joe, Have you read the performance brief? http://www.macromedia.com/software/coldfusion/whitepapers/pdf/cfmx_performance_brief.pdf Bear in mind that the tests of scalability etc, are typically done using what would be a production environment. In development you have the overhead of compiling the templates, and certainly during this compilation phase the CPU utilisation peaks at up to 100%, but this is hardly reflective of what the user would see. Cheers Mark This is really funny over and over.. no facts/proofs of test by anybody I would really be exited and happy to know that CFMX Scales... If i can see some facts/proofs. Joe -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 11:05 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? On Sunday, July 28, 2002, at 05:57 , Joe Eugene wrote: I am having a hard time.. conveying the messsage.. Yes, so it seems :) We are talking about basic code in ColdFusion.. every answer i get is like.. Custom Tags..(oh for CFMX u need to do this.. or this is how you can Optimize.. for CFMX...CFC .. function blah blah) That's because you are not being specific about what code you are testing that is running slower. Show us your code! Nobody has said.. alright.. if you code CFLOOP this way in CF5.0 you can speed it up writing CFLOOP like THIS(.) in CFMX. Because the code fragment you posted did not seem to be real code (a simple cfloop that created an impossibly long string). No one has suggested that such basic constructs need rewriting in CFMX. Custom tag invocation is definitely faster - several people here have testified to that. ARE YOU GUYS SAYING THAT CFMX is 10% FASTER THAN CF5.0? If so.. What were the TESTS you did to prove this? READ THE PERFORMANCE BRIEF! As Todd (I think?) said, people are beginning to tune you out because you are not providing any facts. Try to be specific. Show us code that you've tested that is slower on CFMX and then we can see why that is. NOTE: Sean... i read quite a lot from here and there.. its awfully.. hard for me to write down who the author,published date.. etc everytime i read something. Why is it hard? You read something, you make a note of the article. C'mon Joe, you're whining a lot but you're not backing it up with details. . If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Alright guys.. i have tried almost what everybody generally knows to CFMX perfomance.. COM, Trusted Cache, Caching template size, Compile takes time etc... Is there anything else that has NOT been brought up? (MM Docs suck) This is really pityfull... CFMX! might do some EXTRA stuff.. but if it cant scale...atleast close to CF5.0... Why buy DAMN CFMX Sorry on my language.. but this is really frustrating! Joe -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 8:41 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? No we are not using any COM objects. Joe -Original Message- From: Jesse Houwing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 6:38 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe Eugene wrote: None of the below have IMPROVED Performance. 1. Trusted Cache (Enabled) 2. Increased Template Cache Size (decrease Cache pops) 3. Decreased Consecutive Request to 5 4. Restarted CF APP Service serveral times after setting changes. NONE of these have done any good so far. That's weird. Are you using COM objects? Those have had a severe slowdown in MX. If you are using COM, try replacing them with java or cfc's if possible. Otherwise generate stub's for them (that should speedup COM objects quite a bit). Jesse __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Is the app large? Are you able to break the test down to just portions at a time? Long shot but perhaps there's a particular operation taking place that causes the memory spike. Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 2:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Alright guys.. i have tried almost what everybody generally knows to CFMX perfomance.. COM, Trusted Cache, Caching template size, Compile takes time etc... Is there anything else that has NOT been brought up? (MM Docs suck) This is really pityfull... CFMX! might do some EXTRA stuff.. but if it cant scale...atleast close to CF5.0... Why buy DAMN CFMX Sorry on my language.. but this is really frustrating! Joe -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 8:41 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? No we are not using any COM objects. Joe -Original Message- From: Jesse Houwing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 6:38 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe Eugene wrote: None of the below have IMPROVED Performance. 1. Trusted Cache (Enabled) 2. Increased Template Cache Size (decrease Cache pops) 3. Decreased Consecutive Request to 5 4. Restarted CF APP Service serveral times after setting changes. NONE of these have done any good so far. That's weird. Are you using COM objects? Those have had a severe slowdown in MX. If you are using COM, try replacing them with java or cfc's if possible. Otherwise generate stub's for them (that should speedup COM objects quite a bit). Jesse __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Joe you're not using the fusebox methodology by any chance are you? Personally I'd love to see Joe submit this code for the app so we can break it apart for him and show him why it's not scaling well. I think it's time for those people that have CFMX running take a stand and say, Gee, well.. I've been running it for over 2 months and ... whew... does it fly. Every situation is unique I realize, but this is not rocket science here and no one will ever admit that the fault just might lie in their code. It's very easy to stand up and start swearing and place the blame and it's always time consuming to get to the root of the problem and swearing and placing the blame isn't going to get you there any faster... Has anyone on the list thought about creating a peer review mailing list? I realize that not everyone can sit and stare at code (we all have our own stuff to do), I myself would be curious about being reviewed by my peer to see if I'm on the right track. ~Todd At 09:53 AM 7/27/2002 -0400, you wrote: Is the app large? Are you able to break the test down to just portions at a time? Long shot but perhaps there's a particular operation taking place that causes the memory spike. Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 2:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Alright guys.. i have tried almost what everybody generally knows to CFMX perfomance.. COM, Trusted Cache, Caching template size, Compile takes time etc... Is there anything else that has NOT been brought up? (MM Docs suck) This is really pityfull... CFMX! might do some EXTRA stuff.. but if it cant scale...atleast close to CF5.0... Why buy DAMN CFMX Sorry on my language.. but this is really frustrating! Joe -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 8:41 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? No we are not using any COM objects. Joe -Original Message- From: Jesse Houwing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 6:38 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe Eugene wrote: None of the below have IMPROVED Performance. 1. Trusted Cache (Enabled) 2. Increased Template Cache Size (decrease Cache pops) 3. Decreased Consecutive Request to 5 4. Restarted CF APP Service serveral times after setting changes. NONE of these have done any good so far. That's weird. Are you using COM objects? Those have had a severe slowdown in MX. If you are using COM, try replacing them with java or cfc's if possible. Otherwise generate stub's for them (that should speedup COM objects quite a bit). Jesse Todd Rafferty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.web-rat.com/ Team Macromedia Volunteer for ColdFusion http://www.macromedia.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/ Moderator @ FlashCFM.com - http://www.flashCFM.com/ Back-end Moderator @ Ultrashock.com - http://www.ultrashock.com/ __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Friday, July 26, 2002, at 11:55 , Joe Eugene wrote: This is really pityfull... CFMX! might do some EXTRA stuff.. but if it cant scale...atleast close to CF5.0... Why buy DAMN CFMX I'm sorry you're so frustrated but CFMX definitely scales better than CF5. I don't think you're really talking about scalability here tho' - scalability is about how the system performs as the number of users increases and about how it performs as the number of resources (CPUs etc) are increased. Scalability has nothing to do with CPU usage. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Todd, This was my original post. All of this testing was for the same content. Simulated 50 concurrent users on CFMX = average 85% CPU on 750Mhz DUAL P3 Processor Simulated 50 concurrent users on CF5.0 = average 12% CPU on 600Mhz Single P3 Processor The content/app was written for CF4.5 and we didnt write any CF5.0 optimized code. Joe -Original Message- From: Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 10:12 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe you're not using the fusebox methodology by any chance are you? Personally I'd love to see Joe submit this code for the app so we can break it apart for him and show him why it's not scaling well. I think it's time for those people that have CFMX running take a stand and say, Gee, well.. I've been running it for over 2 months and ... whew... does it fly. Every situation is unique I realize, but this is not rocket science here and no one will ever admit that the fault just might lie in their code. It's very easy to stand up and start swearing and place the blame and it's always time consuming to get to the root of the problem and swearing and placing the blame isn't going to get you there any faster... Has anyone on the list thought about creating a peer review mailing list? I realize that not everyone can sit and stare at code (we all have our own stuff to do), I myself would be curious about being reviewed by my peer to see if I'm on the right track. ~Todd At 09:53 AM 7/27/2002 -0400, you wrote: Is the app large? Are you able to break the test down to just portions at a time? Long shot but perhaps there's a particular operation taking place that causes the memory spike. Stace -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 2:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Alright guys.. i have tried almost what everybody generally knows to CFMX perfomance.. COM, Trusted Cache, Caching template size, Compile takes time etc... Is there anything else that has NOT been brought up? (MM Docs suck) This is really pityfull... CFMX! might do some EXTRA stuff.. but if it cant scale...atleast close to CF5.0... Why buy DAMN CFMX Sorry on my language.. but this is really frustrating! Joe -Original Message- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 8:41 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? No we are not using any COM objects. Joe -Original Message- From: Jesse Houwing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 6:38 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe Eugene wrote: None of the below have IMPROVED Performance. 1. Trusted Cache (Enabled) 2. Increased Template Cache Size (decrease Cache pops) 3. Decreased Consecutive Request to 5 4. Restarted CF APP Service serveral times after setting changes. NONE of these have done any good so far. That's weird. Are you using COM objects? Those have had a severe slowdown in MX. If you are using COM, try replacing them with java or cfc's if possible. Otherwise generate stub's for them (that should speedup COM objects quite a bit). Jesse Todd Rafferty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.web-rat.com/ Team Macromedia Volunteer for ColdFusion http://www.macromedia.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/ Moderator @ FlashCFM.com - http://www.flashCFM.com/ Back-end Moderator @ Ultrashock.com - http://www.ultrashock.com/ __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
The content/app was written for CF4.5... Again, it might be time to start thinking about streamlining for MX. I'm *glad* you tested your application, at least I hope these specs below are not coming from your production server. However, this shouldn't be your source of frustration. This should be groundwork for you to build a case and present to your boss, Hey Boss, we've got some work to do, check this out... MX is new (should be considered 1.0 for all intent and purposes of a total rewrite of an existing application). MX is the future (sorry to say it, but ... I think the rest of the world is moving forward with or without you). A proper sweep through the Content/app written for CF4.5 should be done to identify the bottle necks, move some of the logic to .cfc's, etc. Have you written one application geared towards CFMX yet? Have you seen the speed? I think that once you've written _1_ application (heck, develop more than one, we encourage it!) geared towards CFMX, you'll see what the rest of us are seeing and I think you'll be pleased with the results (as the rest of us are). Please don't take this email personally. This isn't hammering YOU (except, you need to calm down some and get back to reality instead of swearing and pointing fingers about it all). I think the biggest problem I've seen so far is the branding of ColdFusion 5. They went from CF4.5.2 to CF5 ... and didn't realize that they can safely bring their 4.5 apps into CF5 and get such a huge speed burst without rewriting any of their crappy coding. CFMX is a different animal, as their has been several discussions that proper care, education and planning will be needed when approaching CFMX. Granted, some of us out here are still learning it all... some of us out here have had the advantage of being a beta tester and are pretty much up to speed, but ... even I'm finding *NEW* things inside CFMX that I haven't found or played with yet. ~Todd At 11:17 AM 7/27/2002 -0400, you wrote: Todd, This was my original post. All of this testing was for the same content. Simulated 50 concurrent users on CFMX = average 85% CPU on 750Mhz DUAL P3 Processor Simulated 50 concurrent users on CF5.0 = average 12% CPU on 600Mhz Single P3 Processor The content/app was written for CF4.5 and we didnt write any CF5.0 optimized code. Joe __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Todd, great post, but how do we learn to optimize for MX? Trial and error? You can write crappy slow code in any language, but a few hits as to how to optimize for MX sure would be nice. I guess we need to find out from Joe what kind of code he has written for that test he posted. How complicated is it? Is it Fusebox? What kind of database? Are there certain pages that seem to be taking extremely long amounts of time to process? My personal problem with MX is stability under load. 10+ service crashes per day on two development servers, but that is another story and one that a fellow from MM started helping me try to figure out, but I have not heard from him in a week. -Original Message- From: Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 10:42 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? The content/app was written for CF4.5... Again, it might be time to start thinking about streamlining for MX. I'm *glad* you tested your application, at least I hope these specs below are not coming from your production server. However, this shouldn't be your source of frustration. This should be groundwork for you to build a case and present to your boss, Hey Boss, we've got some work to do, check this out... MX is new (should be considered 1.0 for all intent and purposes of a total rewrite of an existing application). MX is the future (sorry to say it, but ... I think the rest of the world is moving forward with or without you). A proper sweep through the Content/app written for CF4.5 should be done to identify the bottle necks, move some of the logic to .cfc's, etc. Have you written one application geared towards CFMX yet? Have you seen the speed? I think that once you've written _1_ application (heck, develop more than one, we encourage it!) geared towards CFMX, you'll see what the rest of us are seeing and I think you'll be pleased with the results (as the rest of us are). Please don't take this email personally. This isn't hammering YOU (except, you need to calm down some and get back to reality instead of swearing and pointing fingers about it all). I think the biggest problem I've seen so far is the branding of ColdFusion 5. They went from CF4.5.2 to CF5 .. and didn't realize that they can safely bring their 4.5 apps into CF5 and get such a huge speed burst without rewriting any of their crappy coding. CFMX is a different animal, as their has been several discussions that proper care, education and planning will be needed when approaching CFMX. Granted, some of us out here are still learning it all... some of us out here have had the advantage of being a beta tester and are pretty much up to speed, but ... even I'm finding *NEW* things inside CFMX that I haven't found or played with yet. ~Todd At 11:17 AM 7/27/2002 -0400, you wrote: Todd, This was my original post. All of this testing was for the same content. Simulated 50 concurrent users on CFMX = average 85% CPU on 750Mhz DUAL P3 Processor Simulated 50 concurrent users on CF5.0 = average 12% CPU on 600Mhz Single P3 Processor The content/app was written for CF4.5 and we didnt write any CF5.0 optimized code. Joe __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
I agree with Todd... On the same note we'd also have to take into account the possibility of a bug...and there's as much of a chance that there's poorly written portion of code that was masked by previous versions of the app server that are now exposed for one reason or another... Bottom line is its hard to tell unless you can break the application down and test portions of it until a bottleneck is found that causes the CPU spike. Are you logging pages that take over X amount of time to execute? Perhaps start by setting that in order to find the heavy hitters in regards to requests that take the most resources. Stace -Original Message- From: Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 11:42 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? The content/app was written for CF4.5... Again, it might be time to start thinking about streamlining for MX. I'm *glad* you tested your application, at least I hope these specs below are not coming from your production server. However, this shouldn't be your source of frustration. This should be groundwork for you to build a case and present to your boss, Hey Boss, we've got some work to do, check this out... MX is new (should be considered 1.0 for all intent and purposes of a total rewrite of an existing application). MX is the future (sorry to say it, but ... I think the rest of the world is moving forward with or without you). A proper sweep through the Content/app written for CF4.5 should be done to identify the bottle necks, move some of the logic to .cfc's, etc. Have you written one application geared towards CFMX yet? Have you seen the speed? I think that once you've written _1_ application (heck, develop more than one, we encourage it!) geared towards CFMX, you'll see what the rest of us are seeing and I think you'll be pleased with the results (as the rest of us are). Please don't take this email personally. This isn't hammering YOU (except, you need to calm down some and get back to reality instead of swearing and pointing fingers about it all). I think the biggest problem I've seen so far is the branding of ColdFusion 5. They went from CF4.5.2 to CF5 ... and didn't realize that they can safely bring their 4.5 apps into CF5 and get such a huge speed burst without rewriting any of their crappy coding. CFMX is a different animal, as their has been several discussions that proper care, education and planning will be needed when approaching CFMX. Granted, some of us out here are still learning it all... some of us out here have had the advantage of being a beta tester and are pretty much up to speed, but ... even I'm finding *NEW* things inside CFMX that I haven't found or played with yet. ~Todd At 11:17 AM 7/27/2002 -0400, you wrote: Todd, This was my original post. All of this testing was for the same content. Simulated 50 concurrent users on CFMX = average 85% CPU on 750Mhz DUAL P3 Processor Simulated 50 concurrent users on CF5.0 = average 12% CPU on 600Mhz Single P3 Processor The content/app was written for CF4.5 and we didnt write any CF5.0 optimized code. Joe __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
I don't think it's essential to optimize for mx but there are opportunities to do so that's for sure. If it's a bug and the system can't scale under a certain condition then I'd agree to raise hellon the other hand if it's a specific operation(s) or environment issue that causes the anomaly then maybe it can be fixed via an optimization. Now you certainly won't hear this from MM Sales but truth be told that if you want to move your production system to a 1.0 release then you *must* account for the possibility of environment issues no matter how remote. I wish it were so but it's not always black and white...we each operate in a unique environment If it helps any I'm interested in helping you track down the cause... Cheers, Stace -Original Message- From: Chad Gray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 12:03 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Todd, great post, but how do we learn to optimize for MX? Trial and error? You can write crappy slow code in any language, but a few hits as to how to optimize for MX sure would be nice. I guess we need to find out from Joe what kind of code he has written for that test he posted. How complicated is it? Is it Fusebox? What kind of database? Are there certain pages that seem to be taking extremely long amounts of time to process? My personal problem with MX is stability under load. 10+ service crashes per day on two development servers, but that is another story and one that a fellow from MM started helping me try to figure out, but I have not heard from him in a week. -Original Message- From: Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 10:42 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? The content/app was written for CF4.5... Again, it might be time to start thinking about streamlining for MX. I'm *glad* you tested your application, at least I hope these specs below are not coming from your production server. However, this shouldn't be your source of frustration. This should be groundwork for you to build a case and present to your boss, Hey Boss, we've got some work to do, check this out... MX is new (should be considered 1.0 for all intent and purposes of a total rewrite of an existing application). MX is the future (sorry to say it, but ... I think the rest of the world is moving forward with or without you). A proper sweep through the Content/app written for CF4.5 should be done to identify the bottle necks, move some of the logic to .cfc's, etc. Have you written one application geared towards CFMX yet? Have you seen the speed? I think that once you've written _1_ application (heck, develop more than one, we encourage it!) geared towards CFMX, you'll see what the rest of us are seeing and I think you'll be pleased with the results (as the rest of us are). Please don't take this email personally. This isn't hammering YOU (except, you need to calm down some and get back to reality instead of swearing and pointing fingers about it all). I think the biggest problem I've seen so far is the branding of ColdFusion 5. They went from CF4.5.2 to CF5 . and didn't realize that they can safely bring their 4.5 apps into CF5 and get such a huge speed burst without rewriting any of their crappy coding. CFMX is a different animal, as their has been several discussions that proper care, education and planning will be needed when approaching CFMX. Granted, some of us out here are still learning it all... some of us out here have had the advantage of being a beta tester and are pretty much up to speed, but ... even I'm finding *NEW* things inside CFMX that I haven't found or played with yet. ~Todd At 11:17 AM 7/27/2002 -0400, you wrote: Todd, This was my original post. All of this testing was for the same content. Simulated 50 concurrent users on CFMX = average 85% CPU on 750Mhz DUAL P3 Processor Simulated 50 concurrent users on CF5.0 = average 12% CPU on 600Mhz Single P3 Processor The content/app was written for CF4.5 and we didnt write any CF5.0 optimized code. Joe __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Todd, great post, but how do we learn to optimize for MX? Trial and error? You can write crappy slow code in any language, but a few hits as to how to optimize for MX sure would be nice. Sean Corfield is hosting the CFMX Best Practices: http://www.corfield.org/coldfusion/codingStandards.htm CF-Talk's very own Michael Dinowitz has good suggestions as well (not nessarily cfmx related): http://www.fusionauthority.com/alert/index.cfm?alertid=9#Tech1 Almost certainly that there's something to be found at: http://www.forta.com/ (there's even CFDJ articles written by him located here). There's also some articles over at the Macromedia DesDev: http://www.macromedia.com/desdev/mx/coldfusion/ There's also certainly more community sites on the way, I know of one but it's too early to announce anything. And, as I much as I hate to say it, some of these resources are still being written. Some cost money (I remember when MetalSite (previous employer) paid gTriad to review our code base, man that was interesting reading -- however, some of it was just common sense and our dev group was failing). One of the best ideas I've seen so far was for a job posting... a company had their own Internal CFUG ... which... damn... this makes a *lot* of sense for a company. Continued education should *always* be part of a development team and if upper management can't see the benifits of an internal CFUG... whew... I don't want to work there. Something else I want to bring up... just because there's a boatload of people that are rushing to put CFMX in their production environment doesn't mean that *YOU* have too. I did the majority of my research during beta testing, not everyone has the time and luxury of doing this... I'm just fortunately geek enough to want to know how this works (and, being single helps too). If your CF4/5 app isn't running 100% in CFMX, then, it's time to research CFCs, It's time to research better UDF writing, it's time to research the new things in CFMX so that you *can* take advantage of these new features and the new speed. Paying attention to the mailing list for a few months before jumping into CFMX is always a good thing. Don't jump, let others jump... take notes. This blogging thing isn't a stupid idea. I make it a regular ritual to go read Sean's, Matt L.'s, CFGuru, Spike's, etc, etc (Yo, David Watts, Ray Camden... where's yours?!). Some of their topics might be a little too advanced or into the underpinnings of java or axis, but now and then I do pull back some worthwhile information from someone's noggin and... perhaps someday when I get around to learning Java, I'll understand what the hell they were posting when they were rambling about it. If you want URLs to these sites, feel free to head over to my domain ( http://www.web-rat.com/ or http://fullasagoog.com/ ) -- I'm trying my best to keep links for all the cfmx related blogs. I know personally that I want to start writing up a whitepaper for my methodology, but I just haven't gotten around to doing such and in the process of too much freelance work and starting my own business (or, looking for a new job - hint hint). ~Todd __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
for those people that have CFMX running take a stand and say, Gee, well.. I've been running it for over 2 months and ... whew... does it fly. I have been running CFMX in production since beta 3 with only minor issues that were addressed in CFMX final. I have recently starting working on a little bit of tuning for application server (built on top of CFMX), so I'd be ready to publish performance numbers when our product is released. I am sharing the results below for the purposes of this thread. However, I must point out that these results are preliminary and may not accurately represent the performance of our application server when it is released. Do not depend on these numbers. Server: Dell PowerEdge 1650 1 866 CPU, 256MB RAM, 1 10,000 RPM SCSI disk, 2 10/100 load balancing and fault redundant NICs OS: RedHat Linux 7.1 with up-to-date errata, custom kernel, ReiserFS, Apache 1.3.23 All tests were done with pre-compiled and loaded CFMs/CFCs and Java classes. The below tests represent the best results achieved during sustained testing. By adjusting the number of simultaneous users, their protocol, and their connection speed these numbers would be reduced. All requests dynamically processed: 26 requests per second Starved RAM with Alchemy caching engine: 1,036 requests per second Alchemy caching engine: 1,815 requests per second -Matt __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Todd,Stacy,Jesse Thanks for the great posts... I am fairly aware of coding patterns and styles.. Code that scale and different ways of scaling. eg (short-cut eval,evaluate,if, switch, IIF..coded right, cfscript, Conditional looping rather nested (CFIF) test looping, variable scoping etc to name a few..) Almost all the posts back.. Poor Coding... Can you tell me how you can improve a LOOP in CFMX Vs CF5.0??? You can do INDEX/CONDITION/Script(For,While) .. There might be some advantage in cases where you can CFSCRIPT other wise.. i dont see.. how you can optimize a LOOP FOR CFMX Vs CF.50. cfset x= cfloop index=i from=1 to=10 cfset x=xi /cfloop All the basic functions in CF are almost the same.. Its only when you get into CUSTOM TAGS/functions which can be implemented in .CFC which can be called CFMX optimized code... What if you are not using CUSTOM TAGS?.. this is generic question.. i am not trying to GET into Custom Tags topic. To make my point clear...I think Basic operations in CFMX show a degraded Performance under load...for specific settings.. I am trying to do the research.. you guys might be right.. There might be some internal CFMX settings that prove.. CFMX Scales better than... CF.50.. Well..where are the MAGIC SETTINGS (MM docs.. dont think so!).. Probably in the HEADof some ENGINEER MM LAIDOFF. Joe Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 12:40 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Todd, great post, but how do we learn to optimize for MX? Trial and error? You can write crappy slow code in any language, but a few hits as to how to optimize for MX sure would be nice. Sean Corfield is hosting the CFMX Best Practices: http://www.corfield.org/coldfusion/codingStandards.htm CF-Talk's very own Michael Dinowitz has good suggestions as well (not nessarily cfmx related): http://www.fusionauthority.com/alert/index.cfm?alertid=9#Tech1 Almost certainly that there's something to be found at: http://www.forta.com/ (there's even CFDJ articles written by him located here). There's also some articles over at the Macromedia DesDev: http://www.macromedia.com/desdev/mx/coldfusion/ There's also certainly more community sites on the way, I know of one but it's too early to announce anything. And, as I much as I hate to say it, some of these resources are still being written. Some cost money (I remember when MetalSite (previous employer) paid gTriad to review our code base, man that was interesting reading -- however, some of it was just common sense and our dev group was failing). One of the best ideas I've seen so far was for a job posting... a company had their own Internal CFUG ... which... damn... this makes a *lot* of sense for a company. Continued education should *always* be part of a development team and if upper management can't see the benifits of an internal CFUG... whew... I don't want to work there. Something else I want to bring up... just because there's a boatload of people that are rushing to put CFMX in their production environment doesn't mean that *YOU* have too. I did the majority of my research during beta testing, not everyone has the time and luxury of doing this... I'm just fortunately geek enough to want to know how this works (and, being single helps too). If your CF4/5 app isn't running 100% in CFMX, then, it's time to research CFCs, It's time to research better UDF writing, it's time to research the new things in CFMX so that you *can* take advantage of these new features and the new speed. Paying attention to the mailing list for a few months before jumping into CFMX is always a good thing. Don't jump, let others jump... take notes. This blogging thing isn't a stupid idea. I make it a regular ritual to go read Sean's, Matt L.'s, CFGuru, Spike's, etc, etc (Yo, David Watts, Ray Camden... where's yours?!). Some of their topics might be a little too advanced or into the underpinnings of java or axis, but now and then I do pull back some worthwhile information from someone's noggin and... perhaps someday when I get around to learning Java, I'll understand what the hell they were posting when they were rambling about it. If you want URLs to these sites, feel free to head over to my domain ( http://www.web-rat.com/ or http://fullasagoog.com/ ) -- I'm trying my best to keep links for all the cfmx related blogs. I know personally that I want to start writing up a whitepaper for my methodology, but I just haven't gotten around to doing such and in the process of too much freelance work and starting my own business (or, looking for a new job - hint hint). ~Todd __ This list and all
Fwd: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
settings that prove.. CFMX Scales better than... CF.50.. Well..where are the MAGIC SETTINGS (MM docs.. dont think so!).. Probably in the HEADof some ENGINEER MM LAIDOFF. Joe Joe, No offense, but ... when people start saying b.s. like this, I just start to tune out what they were original asking for. There are ways of being professional without having to start to slam people, companies, etc. In fact, sometimes if you focus on the problem at hand instead taking your shots now and then, people might perceive you know what you're talking about and attempt to help you hunt down the problem. I can understand being upset, but being upset isn't going to solve your problem. Good luck with your research. ~Todd Todd Rafferty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.web-rat.com/ Team Macromedia Volunteer for ColdFusion http://www.macromedia.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/ Moderator @ FlashCFM.com - http://www.flashCFM.com/ Back-end Moderator @ Ultrashock.com - http://www.ultrashock.com/ __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Well, I would start off by looking at what differences there might be in the 2 different servers you are testing against. I have found many times I think a coding error is causing problems, and it ends up being something totally different when dealing with 2 different machines. Is this a fresh install of MX? 1. Service packs for the OS 2. Service packs for the database. 3. MDAC updates Are you using any CFX tags in your app? If so, start there... Douglas Brown Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Todd [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 12:46 PM Subject: Fwd: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? settings that prove.. CFMX Scales better than... CF.50.. Well..where are the MAGIC SETTINGS (MM docs.. dont think so!).. Probably in the HEADof some ENGINEER MM LAIDOFF. Joe Joe, No offense, but ... when people start saying b.s. like this, I just start to tune out what they were original asking for. There are ways of being professional without having to start to slam people, companies, etc. In fact, sometimes if you focus on the problem at hand instead taking your shots now and then, people might perceive you know what you're talking about and attempt to help you hunt down the problem. I can understand being upset, but being upset isn't going to solve your problem. Good luck with your research. ~Todd Todd Rafferty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.web-rat.com/ Team Macromedia Volunteer for ColdFusion http://www.macromedia.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/ Moderator @ FlashCFM.com - http://www.flashCFM.com/ Back-end Moderator @ Ultrashock.com - http://www.ultrashock.com/ __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
To make my point clear...I think Basic operations in CFMX show a degraded Performance under load...for specific settings.. I am trying to do the research.. you guys might be right.. There might be some internal CFMX settings that prove.. CFMX Scales better than... CF.50.. Well..where are the MAGIC SETTINGS (MM docs.. dont think so!).. Probably in the HEAD of some ENGINEER MM LAIDOFF. I doubt that there are any magic settings anywhere. The fact is, CF MX is a completely different engine than CF 5, so the appropriate tuning settings for CF 5 are largely irrelevant. Even with CF 5, optimal tuning settings had to be determined by load testing your servers with their specific applications. You'll need to repeat this process with CF MX. I suspect that the settings you end up with may be completely different. For example, there's a simultaneous requests setting; to determine the optimal value for this, you really had to do load testing under CF 5 or any prior version. The same is true for CF MX now, however its unlikely to be the same value as it was for CF 5. You might want to approach this from scratch - don't follow any assumptions about what works well with CF 5. Load test your individual application to find the bottlenecks, and identify the operations that are taking longer (and causing those bottlenecks). Again, they might not be the same set of operations that caused bottlenecks in CF 5. See what changes you can make in those operations, and test to see what difference those changes can make. Then, once you're done load testing your application specifically, use the same load test path to determine optimal settings for CF server tuning switches. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Thanks Guys... for all your replies.. i will continue.. the load test and see what i can come up with.. It would have been great...if MM published some like CF Coding Practices for CFMX Vs CF Coding Practices BEFORE CFMX. eg i saw a statment like cfset x=hello/ MM docs.. dont imply / anywhere.. so where / come from? it doesnt break the code.. so is this optimized CMFX? If this is the case Developers will have a lot of work..getting code optimized for CFMX... Joe -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 4:29 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? To make my point clear...I think Basic operations in CFMX show a degraded Performance under load...for specific settings.. I am trying to do the research.. you guys might be right.. There might be some internal CFMX settings that prove.. CFMX Scales better than... CF.50.. Well..where are the MAGIC SETTINGS (MM docs.. dont think so!).. Probably in the HEAD of some ENGINEER MM LAIDOFF. I doubt that there are any magic settings anywhere. The fact is, CF MX is a completely different engine than CF 5, so the appropriate tuning settings for CF 5 are largely irrelevant. Even with CF 5, optimal tuning settings had to be determined by load testing your servers with their specific applications. You'll need to repeat this process with CF MX. I suspect that the settings you end up with may be completely different. For example, there's a simultaneous requests setting; to determine the optimal value for this, you really had to do load testing under CF 5 or any prior version. The same is true for CF MX now, however its unlikely to be the same value as it was for CF 5. You might want to approach this from scratch - don't follow any assumptions about what works well with CF 5. Load test your individual application to find the bottlenecks, and identify the operations that are taking longer (and causing those bottlenecks). Again, they might not be the same set of operations that caused bottlenecks in CF 5. See what changes you can make in those operations, and test to see what difference those changes can make. Then, once you're done load testing your application specifically, use the same load test path to determine optimal settings for CF server tuning switches. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
cfset x = hello/ is just following XHTML standards, nothing more. It doesn't speed or slow down your application in any case (to my knowledge). ~Todd At 04:58 PM 7/27/2002 -0400, you wrote: Thanks Guys... for all your replies.. i will continue.. the load test and see what i can come up with.. It would have been great...if MM published some like CF Coding Practices for CFMX Vs CF Coding Practices BEFORE CFMX. eg i saw a statment like cfset x=hello/ MM docs.. dont imply / anywhere.. so where / come from? it doesnt break the code.. so is this optimized CMFX? If this is the case Developers will have a lot of work..getting code optimized for CFMX... Joe -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 4:29 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? To make my point clear...I think Basic operations in CFMX show a degraded Performance under load...for specific settings.. I am trying to do the research.. you guys might be right.. There might be some internal CFMX settings that prove.. CFMX Scales better than... CF.50.. Well..where are the MAGIC SETTINGS (MM docs.. dont think so!).. Probably in the HEAD of some ENGINEER MM LAIDOFF. I doubt that there are any magic settings anywhere. The fact is, CF MX is a completely different engine than CF 5, so the appropriate tuning settings for CF 5 are largely irrelevant. Even with CF 5, optimal tuning settings had to be determined by load testing your servers with their specific applications. You'll need to repeat this process with CF MX. I suspect that the settings you end up with may be completely different. For example, there's a simultaneous requests setting; to determine the optimal value for this, you really had to do load testing under CF 5 or any prior version. The same is true for CF MX now, however its unlikely to be the same value as it was for CF 5. You might want to approach this from scratch - don't follow any assumptions about what works well with CF 5. Load test your individual application to find the bottlenecks, and identify the operations that are taking longer (and causing those bottlenecks). Again, they might not be the same set of operations that caused bottlenecks in CF 5. See what changes you can make in those operations, and test to see what difference those changes can make. Then, once you're done load testing your application specifically, use the same load test path to determine optimal settings for CF server tuning switches. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Saturday, July 27, 2002, at 08:17 , Joe Eugene wrote: Simulated 50 concurrent users on CFMX = average 85% CPU on 750Mhz DUAL P3 Processor Simulated 50 concurrent users on CF5.0 = average 12% CPU on 600Mhz Single P3 Processor Right, but that's 'just' CPU usage and has nothing to do with actual throughput capacity. I admit that I'm surprised at the high-CPU usage - I' d expect to see that only when CFMX is actually compiling templates on every page hit. I'd be interested to see the response times / pages per minutes served in these tests. As I said in another post - we see 100% CPU utilization on web servers with no ill effects. If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Saturday, July 27, 2002, at 09:39 , Todd wrote: Sean Corfield is hosting the CFMX Best Practices: http://www.corfield.org/coldfusion/codingStandards.htm Note that this document is about writing *maintainable* code more than writing high-performance code. I may update the public document if we update our internal guidelines with specific CFMX performance guidelines. One of the best ideas I've seen so far was for a job posting... a company had their own Internal CFUG ... which... damn... this makes a *lot* of sense for a company. Yeah, we pretty much do this. We have a mailing list for CF-related development issues and we also have a CF-architecture list. Todd's right about how much time this takes up. I wrote an article for the DesDev Center on Facades as a design pattern to improve performance in Rich Internet Apps but I don't get enough time to write a regular column so my blog is about the best I can do right now. I used to edit a C++ journal - and write articles for it (mostly re-published on my web site) - but had to give it up for lack of time (and subsequently turned down CUJ when they asked me to write for them). I'd love to spend more time and effort digging into what makes some CF4.5 / CF5 behave badly on CFMX and how to make them run better. I'd love to spend some time investigating Fusebox performance in particular since that subject has cropped up here. Yes, I do come across some performance tweaks in my day job - I'll blog the ones I think people might be able to use... Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Saturday, July 27, 2002, at 12:35 , Joe Eugene wrote: in cases where you can CFSCRIPT other wise.. i dont see.. how you can Well, there's no real reason why cfscript should be faster (or slower) than using tags now - it all compiles to similar Java code. cfset x= cfloop index=i from=1 to=10 cfset x=xi /cfloop Are you saying this particular test runs slower on CFMX than CF5? (I'd be surprised if either system could cope with the resultant 'x' string). All the basic functions in CF are almost the same.. Its only when you get into CUSTOM TAGS/functions which can be implemented in .CFC which can be called CFMX optimized code... But custom tags and CFCs now run about the same speed (i.e., custom tags are much faster in CFMX than they were in CF5). I am trying to do the research.. you guys might be right.. There might be some internal CFMX settings that prove.. CFMX Scales better than... CF.50. . Keep us posted on results you find - but make sure you post the tests too so we can verify those results. Well..where are the MAGIC SETTINGS (MM docs.. dont think so!).. There are no magic settings. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
On Saturday, July 27, 2002, at 01:58 , Joe Eugene wrote: eg i saw a statment like cfset x=hello/ MM docs.. dont imply / anywhere.. so where / come from? it doesnt break the code.. so is this optimized CMFX? Where did you see that statement? You need to start being a bit more specific about things and then you'll get more helpful answers. Maybe you saw code like that in the Coding Guidelines I published? Yes, we are trying to require XHTML-compliant generated pages so it's more consistent to have XHTML-compliant CFML source code. There's no magic here. Nothing to do with CFMX. In fact, requiring the closing / in tag invocations means that our developers have to be more defensive when they write custom tags because of the start/end executionMode thing (see my recent blog entry for more details). If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Joe Eugene wrote: None of the below have IMPROVED Performance. 1. Trusted Cache (Enabled) 2. Increased Template Cache Size (decrease Cache pops) 3. Decreased Consecutive Request to 5 4. Restarted CF APP Service serveral times after setting changes. NONE of these have done any good so far. That's weird. Are you using COM objects? Those have had a severe slowdown in MX. If you are using COM, try replacing them with java or cfc's if possible. Otherwise generate stub's for them (that should speedup COM objects quite a bit). Jesse __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
None of the below have IMPROVED Performance. 1. Trusted Cache (Enabled) 2. Increased Template Cache Size (decrease Cache pops) 3. Decreased Consecutive Request to 5 4. Restarted CF APP Service serveral times after setting changes. NONE of these have done any good so far. Joe - Original Message - From: Jesse Houwing [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 4:59 PM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe Eugene wrote: Trusted Cache was NOT turned on either of the servers (CFMX or CF 5.0) Try a run with trusted cache, this should make MX much faster and more responsive. Have you also tried lowering the number of consecutive requests? This may prove helpful too. MX needs less than 5 with better result (see the mx performance test). Jesse __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Joe Eugene wrote: Trusted Cache was NOT turned on either of the servers (CFMX or CF 5.0) Try a run with trusted cache, this should make MX much faster and more responsive. Have you also tried lowering the number of consecutive requests? This may prove helpful too. MX needs less than 5 with better result (see the mx performance test). Jesse __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Joe Eugene wrote: The results were for TESTS THAT WERE RAN 15-18 HOURS AT A TIME.. So u know the pages have already been compiled and loaded. With or without trusted cache? Jesse __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Brook Davies wrote: Yikes. Is this on the first past or after the pages are compiled? I will ask again, does any one have a script to pre compile all pages within a directory? This would be a nice option to have in the administrator or at least a executable provided by MM. This came up about two days back. put the followong stuff in a batch file and run that: setlocal set NEO_INSTALL=c:\cfusionMX set PATH=%NEO_INSTALL%\runtime\bin;%PATH% java -classpath %NEO_INSTALL%\lib\cfusion.jar coldfusion.tools.Compiler -webroot %NEO_INSTALL%\wwwroot %* endlocal Jesse __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
The results were for TESTS THAT WERE RAN 15-18 HOURS AT A TIME.. So u know the pages have already been compiled and loaded. Joe - Original Message - From: Brook Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 4:15 PM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Yikes. Is this on the first past or after the pages are compiled? I will ask again, does any one have a script to pre compile all pages within a directory? This would be a nice option to have in the administrator or at least a executable provided by MM. At 03:46 PM 26/07/02 -0400, you wrote: Hi all, Have seen some problems reported with CFMX. These are our testing results.. Window 2000 boxes for same CONTENT.. Testing done with MICROSOFT WEB APPLICATION STRESS TOOL JRun.exe is whats taking all the CPU on CFMX box Simulated 50 concurrent users on CFMX = average 85% CPU on 750Mhz DUAL P3 Processor Simulated 50 concurrent users on CF5.0 = average 12% CPU on 600Mhz Single P3 Processor Does anybody know why is this is happening? this makes it pretty scary to got to CFMX! Joe __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Yikes. Is this on the first past or after the pages are compiled? I will ask again, does any one have a script to pre compile all pages within a directory? This would be a nice option to have in the administrator or at least a executable provided by MM. At 03:46 PM 26/07/02 -0400, you wrote: Hi all, Have seen some problems reported with CFMX. These are our testing results.. Window 2000 boxes for same CONTENT.. Testing done with MICROSOFT WEB APPLICATION STRESS TOOL JRun.exe is whats taking all the CPU on CFMX box Simulated 50 concurrent users on CFMX = average 85% CPU on 750Mhz DUAL P3 Processor Simulated 50 concurrent users on CF5.0 = average 12% CPU on 600Mhz Single P3 Processor Does anybody know why is this is happening? this makes it pretty scary to got to CFMX! Joe __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
Trusted Cache was NOT turned on either of the servers (CFMX or CF 5.0) Joe - Original Message - From: Jesse Houwing [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 4:27 PM Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe Eugene wrote: The results were for TESTS THAT WERE RAN 15-18 HOURS AT A TIME.. So u know the pages have already been compiled and loaded. With or without trusted cache? Jesse __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources?
No we are not using any COM objects. Joe -Original Message- From: Jesse Houwing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 6:38 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX Taking all CPU Resources? Joe Eugene wrote: None of the below have IMPROVED Performance. 1. Trusted Cache (Enabled) 2. Increased Template Cache Size (decrease Cache pops) 3. Decreased Consecutive Request to 5 4. Restarted CF APP Service serveral times after setting changes. NONE of these have done any good so far. That's weird. Are you using COM objects? Those have had a severe slowdown in MX. If you are using COM, try replacing them with java or cfc's if possible. Otherwise generate stub's for them (that should speedup COM objects quite a bit). Jesse __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
