The official MM/Allaire line is that shared-scope variables should be locked by scope
and not by name (it's in the Knowledge Base).
Yes, locking by name should be faster, if you coordinate it right - remember that
locking doesn't lock anything, it merely coordinates access to the variables.
t let me use scope. When I try using the
>wizard, it doesn't put it in..When I add it manually, I get an error.
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Jim McAtee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 10:47 AM
>To: CF-Talk
>Subject: Re: Is name l
e: Is name locking sufficient for session vars?
- Original Message -
From: "cf refactoring" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 9:09 AM
Subject: Is name locking sufficient for session vars?
> There's so
- Original Message -
From: "cf refactoring" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 9:09 AM
Subject: Is name locking sufficient for session vars?
> There's something that's been buggin me:
>
&g
There's something that's been buggin me:
Is NAME LOCKING sufficient for session variables?
A best practice in CF is to always lock session
variable access, but it's not really clear whether
1) NAME locking is sufficient or
2) should we always lock with SCOPE=SESSION?
To me, the answer seem
5 matches
Mail list logo
