;
> > o Sometimes the COLDFUSION APPLICATION works fine when we delete the
> > browser history.
> >
> > · The application was stable for the past three years and no
> > changes has been made. Suddenly for the past 3 weeks we are getting
> > applicati
ers. We checked with our network team but
> nothing has been changed by them recently.
>
> · Please suggest me some tips that you might have used to increase
> the performance of CF application.
>
>
> Sathya
>
>
>
~~
d by them recently.
>
> · Please suggest me some tips that you might have used to increase
> the performance of CF application.
>
>
> Sathya
>
>
>
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http
that you might have used to increase
the performance of CF application.
Sathya
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archiv
:
>
> I am doing some performance test on a site running on ColdFusion 8 using
> FusionReactor. There is one script that consistently ends up on the top of
> the long running requests list. The script is very simple - it grabs a PDF
> file that already exists on the files system and st
You could maybe try reading the pdf as a binary with cffile into a
variable and outputting it that way with
Could be cfcontent is opening the file and not closing all the way or something.
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Jeff Chastain
wrote:
>
> I am doing some performance test on
;java.io.File").init( filePath & fileName ).exists();
-Jake
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jeff Chastain wrote:
>
> I am doing some performance test on a site running on ColdFusion 8 using
> FusionReactor. There is one script that consistently ends up on the top of
> the long run
I am doing some performance test on a site running on ColdFusion 8 using
FusionReactor. There is one script that consistently ends up on the top of the
long running requests list. The script is very simple - it grabs a PDF file
that already exists on the files system and streams it to the
Thanks Byron -- I am going to roll out CF10 on a couple of sites and
see how it goes. I can always roll back if I have to.
--
Cheers!
Michael David
-- Original Message --
From: "Byron Mann"
To: "cf-talk"
Sent: 6/13/2012 1:51:21 AM
Subject: Re: CF10 vs CF9
on Jetty and using trusted authentication with the baked in
MS SQL driver.
With CF10 we couldn't get trusted auth working with the MS JDBC driver and
reverted back to the CF10 MS SQL driver without issue.
Performance wise, we used IIS rewrite rules to offload the Cf requests to
the 9 cluste
Has anyone seen any performance stats on CF10 vs CF9?
Also, has anyone here put CF10 into production yet? I usually wait for
a few months to see if any issues arise, but am pondering putting CF10
into production on a project that will be launching soon.
--
Cheers!
Michael David
ere CF falls a bit short of the mark - not great
>with truly long import/export requests or really large files. I like Perl
>for that sort of thing. Or one of the many import/export tools that go with
>a RDBMS. For example MSSQL can output to a file using SSIS.
>
>-Mark
>
>Mark Kru
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Improving Performance
so, I got two suggestions from this thread that proved worthy..
#1 - someone asked about the need for the .toString() call - apparently, I
don't actually need this. I ran some tests without it and it worked and
speed things up.
#2 - So
instead.
>
> I was able to improve the performance of an output of 20,000 records from
> 21 seconds to around 12 seconds with these two changes.
>
>
>
>
> resultSet[fieldsArray[i]][resultSet.currentRow] )>
>
>
>
> Thanks all!
>
> Rick
>
>
f one field at a time.
CsvWriter has a writeRecord() method that accepts an array, so I modified the
code to put the values into an array and then use that method instead.
I was able to improve the performance of an output of 20,000 records from 21
seconds to around 12 seconds with these two ch
so why not try just cfloop over the query normally and output only the
columns you want
#column1# #columns2#
etc...
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Rick Root wrote:
>
> >does the original data need to be a 2 dimensional array or can you
> generate
> >it as q uery, then you only have 1 loop
Rick Root wrote:
>
> Can anyone suggest ways that might incrementally improve the performance of
> this code?
>
> I'm using the JavaCSV library to generate a CSV file. It works pretty well,
> but has some difficulty outputting extremely large files (50,000+ record
9:11 AM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Improving Performance
oops.. 180 columns, not 1800 =)
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive
>do you really need to perform the ToString() function ?
>
Yes, since sometimes the data in the query is NOT a "string object" .. it is
sometimes a date, and coldfusion will try to pass it in as a date, and since
CsvWriter is java, and expects a string, it doesn't like getting date objects =)
>does the original data need to be a 2 dimensional array or can you generate
>it as q uery, then you only have 1 loop.
It actually is a query - however the query contains fields that aren't
necessarily going to be in the output file. There wouldn't necessarily have to
be an inside loop but the
does the original data need to be a 2 dimensional array or can you generate
it as q uery, then you only have 1 loop.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Rick Root wrote:
>
> Can anyone suggest ways that might incrementally improve the performance of
> this code?
>
> I'm using
do you really need to perform the ToString() function ?
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Rick Root wrote:
>
> Well, I think the JavaCSV method is pretty fast. What I'm wondering is if
> there's a better way to do this line:
>
> resultSet[fieldsArray[i]][resultSet.currentRow].toString() )>
>
>
oops.. 180 columns, not 1800 =)
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/mes
> Well, I think the JavaCSV method is pretty fast. What I'm wondering
> is if there's a better way to do this line:
>
> resultSet[fieldsArray[i]][resultSet.currentRow].toString() )>
And I mean in terms of evaluating the field
resultSet[fieldsArray[i]][resultSet.currentRow]
Like, maybe if I
.com
O: 402.408.3733 x105
E: mkru...@cfwebtools.com
Skype: markakruger
-Original Message-
From: Rick Root [mailto:rick.r...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 8:50 AM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Improving Performance
Can anyone suggest ways that might incrementally improve the perf
Well, I think the JavaCSV method is pretty fast. What I'm wondering is if
there's a better way to do this line:
Let's say you improve the speed of that line by 0.1ms ... that improves a
50,000 row 100 column generation by 500 secnds.
This is part of a dynamic report generation tool, run by
to that.
And finally, there are some CFX tags around for writing to CSV files, you
could give one of them a try.
Russ
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Rick Root wrote:
>
> Can anyone suggest ways that might incrementally improve the performance of
> this code?
>
> I'm using
Can anyone suggest ways that might incrementally improve the performance of
this code?
I'm using the JavaCSV library to generate a CSV file. It works pretty well,
but has some difficulty outputting extremely large files (50,000+ records,
1800 columns or so)
(formatted pastebin here:
ick Kerley
kerl...@yahoo.com
-
From: Edward Chanter
To: cf-talk
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 11:27 AM
Subject: RE: CFPDF Performance Issues
Using an IP won't work because the IP resolves to multiple virtual hosts :)
Yeah I agree it is bizarre. Then ag
Is this a bug?
>
> Brook
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Edward Chanter [mailto:firew...@cc.uk.com]
> Sent: June-14-11 7:45 AM
> To: cf-talk
> Subject: RE: CFPDF Performance Issues
>
>
> I tried a very simple test of using replace() to edit the URL of the
images
> t
16:11
> To: cf-talk
> Subject: RE: CFPDF Performance Issues
>
>
> That's bizarre. What happens if you use an IP address instead of a domain?
> Is this a bug?
>
> Brook
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Edward Chanter [mailto:firew...@cc.uk.com]
>
That's bizarre. What happens if you use an IP address instead of a domain?
Is this a bug?
Brook
-Original Message-
From: Edward Chanter [mailto:firew...@cc.uk.com]
Sent: June-14-11 7:45 AM
To: cf-talk
Subject: RE: CFPDF Performance Issues
I tried a very simple test of using re
k
> Subject: Re: CFPDF Performance Issues
>
>
> Image handling is the most likely cause of the slowness. The first test I
would
> do is to temporarily take out every image, or knock out all HTML tags if
you
> are pulling content from CFHTTP, to see how many seconds those tags
>
14 June 2011 14:14
> > To: cf-talk
> > Subject: Re: CFPDF Performance Issues
> >
> >
> > We've seen that when we have CFPDF's with Images that as ridiculous as
> this
> > sounds sometimes we need to move the images to different domains (multi
> > dom
I will try that, thanks :) It'll take me a while because the pages are
relative complex but I will let you know how it goes.
> -Original Message-
> From: Patrick Kerley [mailto:kerl...@yahoo.com]
> Sent: 14 June 2011 14:14
> To: cf-talk
> Subject: Re: CFPD
eeds it up?
-
Patrick Kerley
kerl...@yahoo.com
-
From: Edward Chanter
To: cf-talk
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 4:48 AM
Subject: CFPDF Performance Issues
I'm having a bit of a weird issue with the creation of PDFs. The issue is
quite simp
mail.com]
> Sent: 14 June 2011 14:03
> To: cf-talk
> Subject: Re: CFPDF Performance Issues
>
>
> What type of speed differences are you seeing? Milliseconds or seconds? Is
> it consistently slower at creating any PDF, or is it only a particular PDF
that is
> slow? Is the
; CFPDF
> service to take a long time to create the PDF? I'm seeing nothing in my
> logs
> and the performance monitor only tells me that the page is slow.
>
> Any ideas are most welcome because this one has me completely stumped.
>
> :)
>
>
>
is causing the
difference in speed. To that end does anyone know what might cause the CFPDF
service to take a long time to create the PDF? I'm seeing nothing in my logs
and the performance monitor only tells me that the page is slow.
Any ideas are most welcome because this one has m
he bottom passing a record variable until
> you reach the end of file or you doing something different?
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Mandel [mailto:mark.man...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 9:03 PM
> To: cf-talk
> Subject: Re:
, March 09, 2011 9:03 PM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Performance Issue with CFLOOP
Batch stuff like this, I tend to break into chunks, and call each chunk
via a cfhttp call. (maybe 1000 records or so per chunk?)
That way you get a single request, that can be entirely gc'd after each
request.
W
bject: RE: Performance Issue with CFLOOP
Not sure what query you are calculating to add back to the original
query, but can it not be done on the database via sql? It would be a
hundreds times quicker than looping over a query to then do it.
Regards,
Andrew Scott
http://www.andyscott.
: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 9:03 PM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Performance Issue with CFLOOP
Batch stuff like this, I tend to break into chunks, and call each chunk
via a cfhttp call. (maybe 1000 records or so per chunk?)
That way you get a single request, that can be entirely gc'd after each
re
Not sure what query you are calculating to add back to the original query,
but can it not be done on the database via sql? It would be a hundreds times
quicker than looping over a query to then do it.
Regards,
Andrew Scott
http://www.andyscott.id.au/
~~~
heap size to 1500mb so will try again. :(
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Michael Grant [mailto:mgr...@modus.bz]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 4:12 PM
> > To: cf-talk
> > Subject: Re: Performance Issue with CFLOOP
> >
> >
> >
owever I tried running the loop over 10k records and I run into this
> error
>
> GC overhead limit exceeded null
>
> I have increase my maximum heap size to 1500mb so will try again. :(
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Grant [mailto:mgr...@modus.bz]
> Sent:
maximum heap size to 1500mb so will try again. :(
-Original Message-
From: Michael Grant [mailto:mgr...@modus.bz]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 4:12 PM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Performance Issue with CFLOOP
Are you sure it's actually the loop slowing down or is it your browser
sl
Thanks a bunch :)
-Original Message-
From: Matt Quackenbush [mailto:quackfu...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 4:34 PM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Performance Issue with CFLOOP
Yes, tweaking your JVM settings (including max heap) *can* fix this. Of
course you are limited to
Yes, tweaking your JVM settings (including max heap) *can* fix this. Of
course you are limited to the amount of RAM you have available to you, which
is limited by both the physical RAM installed and potentially your OS.
I am by no means an expert on this particular topic. I usually rely on Mike
-talk
Subject: Re: Performance Issue with CFLOOP
Yes, it will slow down with a query of that size. This is totally
natural and completely expected behavior, because you are loading up the
JVM. The closer you get to reaching its max threshold, the slower
things will become.
Is there any reason
Yes, it will slow down with a query of that size. This is totally natural
and completely expected behavior, because you are loading up the JVM. The
closer you get to reaching its max threshold, the slower things will become.
Is there any reason why you are not doing this in smaller segments?
A
Are you sure it's actually the loop slowing down or is it your browser
slowing down from all the cfflush-ing? Try removing the cfflush and track
the time it takes by writing the execution time to an array then dump out
the array after the loop completes and compare your results. That will at
least
Looking for any ideas here.
I'm running a cfloop over a query from a database with a little over
60,000 records in it on MSSQL. I am doing a cfflush so I can watch what
record it is on so I can keep up with how quickly or slowly the loop is
running. The problem is after about 4850ish records t
Ben,
The settings for -XX:PermSize=512m -XX:MaxPermSize=512m seem a bit large based
on the max heap size of 1024. Did you run some tuning tests to see that these
sizes were needed? I usually see settings on high load servers around 128/192
up-to 192/256. These are all based on the particular
I did a talk recently at CFMeetup on CF JVM related matters. You can know what
is going on inside CF JVM. Knowing is good it may not be the JVM args that are
causing your problems, then you can get on with finding out what really is
wrong. Else if the JVM shows it is having GC or memory issues
I did a talk recently at CFMeetup on CF JVM related matters. You can know what
is going on inside CF JVM. Knowing is good it may not be the JVM args that are
causing your problems, then you can get on with finding out what really is
wrong. Else if the JVM shows it is having GC or memory issues
g.com
-Original Message-
From: Mark A. Kruger [mailto:mkru...@cfwebtools.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 1:56 PM
To: cf-talk
Subject: RE: JVM args, GC issues, performance tuning - CF9, Win2k8
Ben,
We'll need some other clues besides the args. My only comment on the args is
that pe
com
www.necfug.com
-Original Message-
From: Ben Raccuia [mailto:bracc...@rc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 1:10 PM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: JVM args, GC issues, performance tuning - CF9, Win2k8
Hello Mark,
I was hoping you could help out in this case as well. I have followed
Rest...
Environment Variables:
PATH=C:\ColdFusion9\runtime\..\lib;C:\ColdFusion9\runtime\..\jintegra\bin;C:\ColdFusion9\runtime\..\jintegra\bin\international;C:\ColdFusion9\runtime\..\lib\oosdk\classes\win;C:\Program
Files\Legato\nsr\bin;C:\ColdFusion9\verity\k2\_nti40\bin;C:\Windows\system32;C:
Hello Mark,
I was hoping you could help out in this case as well. I have followed this
post and made the recommended changes you specified, but still we have periodic
CF service restarts. I have attached the VM arguments and evars. Any help in
direction would be welcome.
Thank you.
BEN
enterprise allows more threads for certain tasks, and also has better cfmail
performance and can handle higher loads, server monitoring is a bonus too.
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 6:53 AM, Matt Quackenbush wrote:
>
> Assuming you are only going to run a single instance, I would not expect to
Assuming you are only going to run a single instance, I would not expect to
see a performance difference between Standard and Enterprise. Of course, if
you need multiple instances (on the same server), then Enterprise is a
requirement. So, basically speaking, unless you need some of the
> Is there any big disparity in performance between CF9 Enterprise and Standard
> (running on windows)?
No, a single instance of Enterprise will perform the same as Standard.
But Enterprise does allow you to install multiple instances, which may
give you better overall performance (pri
Hi to all.
Is there any big disparity in performance between CF9 Enterprise and Standard
(running on windows)?
I have looked at Adobe's comparison matrix and it seems that those items listed
as single request on standard will not hamper this particular site. And since I
am the only us
I'm on ColdFusion 8. :)
-Original Message-
From: Wil Genovese [mailto:jugg...@trunkful.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 1:18 PM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Performance Monitoring
Paul,
Which version of ColdFusion is running? Some settings in the CF8 and CF9
Enterprise editio
esday, November 23, 2010 10:36 AM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Performance Monitoring
Hi All,
Does anyone know if there is any performance issues with enabling
performance monitoring settings?
This setting is in the ColdFusion administrator under Debugging And Logging
à Debug Output Settings à E
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Paul Alkema wrote:
> This setting is in the ColdFusion administrator under Debugging And Logging
> à Debug Output Settings à Enable Performance Monitoring.
I am not aware of any problems with enabling *that* setting. The
Memory Monitoring option in the
Paul,
Which version of ColdFusion is running? Some settings in the CF8 and CF9
Enterprise edition may have some performance hit on high load servers. In rare
cases the Server Monitor may have a large impact on performance with certain
settings (Enable Memory Tracking) enabled.
In general
Hi All,
Does anyone know if there is any performance issues with enabling
performance monitoring settings?
This setting is in the ColdFusion administrator under Debugging And Logging
à Debug Output Settings à Enable Performance Monitoring.
Is this setting ok to enable in a production
I ran a variant of John's code using the rand function for the string length
and got fairly similar results as before.
>It may well depend on the size and number of the strings, since the
>main inefficiencies can be piling up of immutable strings and
>subsequent GC. And like they say, there's "l
've seen. Both ArrayAppend and
> cfsaveContent came out the fastest in John Whish's testing on CF8 (see
> http://www.aliaspooryorik.com/blog/index.cfm/e/posts.details/post/string-concatenation-performance-test-128).
> In most cases both of these were faster than StringBuilder or Stri
n. Both ArrayAppend and
cfsaveContent came out the fastest in John Whish's testing on CF8 (see
http://www.aliaspooryorik.com/blog/index.cfm/e/posts.details/post/string-concatenation-performance-test-128).
In most cases both of these were faster than StringBuilder or StringBuffer.
concatenate with co
) performance vs PHP (5)
It must do as it requires createObject(java) to be enabled and the java
class loader.
Russ
-Original Message-
From: Mark A. Kruger [mailto:mkru...@cfwebtools.com]
Sent: 07 November 2010 21:46
To: cf-talk
Subject: RE: CF (8.0.0) performance vs PHP (5)
John,
Hey
It must do as it requires createObject(java) to be enabled and the java
class loader.
Russ
-Original Message-
From: Mark A. Kruger [mailto:mkru...@cfwebtools.com]
Sent: 07 November 2010 21:46
To: cf-talk
Subject: RE: CF (8.0.0) performance vs PHP (5)
John,
Hey keep in mind that
e.com
www.necfug.com
-Original Message-
From: John M Bliss [mailto:bliss.j...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 11:41 AM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: CF (8.0.0) performance vs PHP (5)
> Moreover what was the code you used. Until we see it for all we know its a
very biased test tow
> Moreover what was the code you used. Until we see it for all we know its a
very biased test towards PHP, CF or HTML.
CF code I used was included in my post. HTML was rendered CF -> view source
-> save as HTML. I don't do PHP.
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Larry Lyons wrote:
>
> Unless
Unless you're testing this under a significant load, such as using jMeter etc.,
this test is essentially meaningless. Loops over thousands or simple page loads
do not mean anything. I'd look at a more real world test, make sure the HTML is
exactly the same, structure the code to be similar etc.
e fairly simple
> tests and found that cfsavecontent was the fastest was to do string
> concatendation, see http://blog.fi.net.au/?p=279
>
> I've run run similar tests using a more robust testing procedure and found
> similar results, (see
> http://www.aliaspooryor
ts.details/post/string-concatenation-performance-test-128)
Basically cfsavecontent is on the average twice as fast as the java string
buffer.
What I'd suggest is do not write the file line by line but build up the string
using cfsavecontent then write the string to disk. I think you'll find tha
I think the cfexecute tag is definitely not the faster cf tag ever.
As an ex php programmer and a current ColdFusion programmer I do have to say
that there is usually a speed benefit to php over ColdFusion however, I do
have to say that I think the overall benefits to ColdFusion far outweigh the
Whatever Jochemyou get the pointa simple page load test with
some queries etc. has nothing to do with the threadit was a SPECIFIC
performance issue.
I bow down to your superior knowledge and use of semantics ;-)
Cheers
On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 09:56 +0200, Jochem van Dieten wrote
e has detailed posts on the exact science of tuning the JVM for
your specific server and application(s). Tuning your application, server, JVM,
database and network are all part of building a high performance high
availability setup. Each is unique and it's really something that should b
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Bryan Stevenson wrote:
> Respectfully Ketanyour tests have nothing to do with the string
> concatenation performance issue that was the crux of this thread ;-)
I very much doubt the performance issue discussed here has anything to
do with
Well, I agree with David... giving PHP a try after using CF for around 8
years, I have found PHP to be much faster on an average setup hardware.
Having said that, Wil, I do realise your point, can you please guide us to
some resource where we can learn performance tuning of CF specially on the
Again this means nothing. I've worked on very high load high performance
ColdFusion based web applications that literally served up 2.5 to 3 million
user requests per day and each request took less than 350ms on average. It
comes down to performance tuning at all layers. The out-of-th
t; This can lead to lots of controvertial posts. I did some performance
> testing long back between HTML, CF, PHP, ASP.NET and Java. The benchmark
> was a static HTML page and everything was measured against the performance
> of HTML. Criteria used in the benchmarking was to generate a datet
Respectfully Ketanyour tests have nothing to do with the string
concatenation performance issue that was the crux of this thread ;-)
Cheers
On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 16:29 -0400, Ketan Jetty wrote:
> This can lead to lots of controvertial posts. I did some performance testing
> lon
ecs.
> There's a large number of variables involved and I can attest to the fact
> that getting even one wrong can adversely affect a test environment.
> Externals such as networks, file systems, operating systems, performance
> tuning, the java layer, databases and more can have v
that getting even one wrong
can adversely affect a test environment. Externals such as networks, file
systems, operating systems, performance tuning, the java layer, databases and
more can have very large affects on the results for each of the languages you
"tested".
Wil Genovese
Sr.
This can lead to lots of controvertial posts. I did some performance testing
long back between HTML, CF, PHP, ASP.NET and Java. The benchmark was a static
HTML page and everything was measured against the performance of HTML. Criteria
used in the benchmarking was to generate a datetime stamp
in the application I was concerned with, attained a
> 10x performance improvement over under condition
> that over 20,000 lines needed to be written out to a text file.
> It aint nuthin special, but might save someone a few minutes...
>
>
>
>
> output="Yes"
ed for
> java.io.FileWriter which, in the application I was concerned with, attained
> a 10x performance improvement over under
> condition that over 20,000 lines needed to be written out to a text file.
> It aint nuthin special, but might save someone a few minutes...
>
>
&g
For those to whom it might be useful, here is the wrapper cfc I used for
java.io.FileWriter which, in the application I was concerned with, attained a
10x performance improvement over under condition
that over 20,000 lines needed to be written out to a text file.
It aint nuthin special, but
> You still didn't answer the question. What is the version number of
> the JVM being used? This is very important. Anything less than 1.6.
> 0_10 is going to have performance issues.
>
Hi Wil,
In regards the JVM version, the original version I saw was 1.6.0_17.
I changed it
>+1,000,000 for Jame's theory about string concatenation. CF is very
>inefficient at this. Doesn't matter much for small stuff and a few
>repeats, but for bulk, a Java buffer is the way to go.
>
Thanks to all those that ventured suggestions ...
There is a hint at what the eventual solution turn
>+1,000,000 for Jame's theory about string concatenation. CF is very
>inefficient at this. Doesn't matter much for small stuff and a few
>repeats, but for bulk, a Java buffer is the way to go.
>
Thanks to all those that ventured suggestions ...
There is a hint at what the eventual solution turn
+1,000,000 for Jame's theory about string concatenation. CF is very
inefficient at this. Doesn't amtter much for small stuff and a few
repeats, but for bulk, a Java buffer is the way to go.
Dave
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Jochem van Dieten wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 5:14 AM, Bryn
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 5:14 AM, Bryn Parrott wrote:
> When I code this algorithm and execute in PHP 5 it runs in 7 seconds (give or
> take);
> When I code and excecute it in CF 8.0.0, it runs in around 74 seconds.
> Sonme might suggest this is difficult since I have deliberately not posted
> t
>If you're appending text line by line to a memory variable, you're
>probably having issues relating to java strings being immutable. If
>you're appending to a file each time, that's probably slowing you
>down.
>>> I was doing the latter e.g. appending to a file for each line. <<<
>
>Try the loop
You still didn't answer the question. What is the version number of the JVM
being used? This is very important. Anything less than 1.6.0_10 is going to
have performance issues.
Wil Genovese
Sr. Web Application Developer/
Systems Administrator
wilg...@trunkful.com
www.trunkful.com
On O
1 - 100 of 1455 matches
Mail list logo
