Russ wrote:
> The 2GB address space limit only exists on 32 bit architectures, correct? A
> server running lets say Windows 2003 x64 Server or any flavor of x64 Linux
> wouldn't have that limitation, correct? So why are we stuck using the
> outdated 32bit JVM?
How long have 64-bit Sun JVMs bee
> 32bit Java. 64bit Java doesn't suffer from this limitation AFAIR.
> Speaking of which, is CF certified on any 64bit java? I remember
> something about it being certified on x64 Solaris or something.
> Is anyone using it on a 64bit Java under windows?
Hmmm, this knowledge base article sh
> -Original Message-
> From: Brad Wood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 3:03 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Is the need for multiple CF instances diminishing?
>
> > Are other technologies limited to 1GB or ram?
>
> Does
> The 2GB address space limit only exists on 32 bit
> architectures, correct? A server running lets say Windows
> 2003 x64 Server or any flavor of x64 Linux wouldn't have that
> limitation, correct? So why are we stuck using the outdated
> 32bit JVM?
Maybe you should direct that question to
>Whoa What about the ability to run your instances with different JVM
>args and allocate memory and resources specifically? And what about
>leveraging more than 1.6 gigs of memory using multi-instances? It seems to
>me there are resource issues that multi instance addresses as well.
Okay, thi
> Are other technologies limited to 1GB or ram?
Doesn't Java suffer from this same "limitation"? It is my understanding
that the memory limit is a Java thing, not a CF thing. Please correct
me if I'm wrong.
> ...the fact that you can't have more then 1GB per instance...
But don't instances o
On 2/6/08, Steven Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Our business is sort of an ASP model where we have a single, main application
> to which we essentially sell subscriptions to large clients. Over the years,
> those clients have demanded unique changes to the app that have caused the
> main co
Yep, and isn't this the biggest weakness of CF to date? Are other
technologies limited to 1GB or ram? PHP/.NET/RoR?
The are if they are limited to pre-JAVA 1.6 (IIRC the version). The limit is
not a ColdFusion specific limit, but a limit it inherits from the underlining
Java. So any techn
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 2:40 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Is the need for multiple CF instances diminishing?
>
> > Yep, and isn't this the biggest weakness of CF to date? Are
> > other technologies limited to 1GB o
> Yep, and isn't this the biggest weakness of CF to date? Are
> other technologies limited to 1GB or ram? PHP/.NET/RoR?
This is a JVM limitation, not a CF limitation. And, it's platform-specific.
The memory limit for a 32-bit JVM is much higher on, say, Solaris - around 4
GB, if I recall correc
ting impossible to run a site that handles a lot of sessions in
CF even with multiple instances/boxes.
Russ
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy Matthews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:46 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Is the need for mul
On Feb 6, 2008 1:51 PM, Dave Watts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, that's not actually what I wrote. There are lots of reasons for
> using
> multiple instances:
> - isolation of services for security/administrative reasons
> - isolation of services for stability reasons
> - ability to configure
Yup, agreed that it should also be considered for anyone looking to setup a
multi-instance. Currently that doesn't fit our need or budget (according to
the owner). I'm just a lead developer plunking down projects for him to
cash out on. I don't get a say in hardware or software installation /
se
> I agree with Dave. If customers feel they need control over
> their servers, then they have that choice. Only other reason
> for mutli-instance would be mappings / unique custom tags
> that they didn't want to make global and such.
Well, that's not actually what I wrote. There are lots of r
, 2008 12:33 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Is the need for multiple CF instances diminishing?
Whoa What about the ability to run your instances with different JVM
args and allocate memory and resources specifically? And what about
leveraging more than 1.6 gigs of memory using multi-instances? It
-Original Message-
From: Todd Rafferty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:06 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Is the need for multiple CF instances diminishing?
I agree with Dave. If customers feel they need control over their servers,
then they have that choice
I agree with Dave. If customers feel they need control over their servers,
then they have that choice. Only other reason for mutli-instance would be
mappings / unique custom tags that they didn't want to make global and
such. I'm finding that the new mappings that you can do in CF8's
Application
Steven,
I would say that it is still quite important - especially if you wish to
leverage more memory on a larger server.
-mark
-Original Message-
From: Steven Wood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 11:12 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Is the need for multiple CF
> Currently we run CF multi-server on JRun, so we have an
> instance for each of our clients. For some reason, we've
> always found this desirable, though we've never really seen
> any clear benefits other than being able to maintain separate
> CFAdmin settings and restart an instance without
Our business is sort of an ASP model where we have a single, main application
to which we essentially sell subscriptions to large clients. Over the years,
those clients have demanded unique changes to the app that have caused the main
code base to split into separate versions.
Currently we run
20 matches
Mail list logo
