-Talk
Sent: Sat Feb 24 22:46:09 2007
Subject: RE: cfstoredproc vs cfquery
> Thanks for your input, Dave. My concern is the processing
> overhead that is incurred by using CFSTOREDPROC. Do you know
> of any way to access multiple recordsets in CFQUERY? As it
> stands now, CFQUERY onl
> Thanks for your input, Dave. My concern is the processing
> overhead that is incurred by using CFSTOREDPROC. Do you know
> of any way to access multiple recordsets in CFQUERY? As it
> stands now, CFQUERY only returns the 1st recordset while
> ignoring the rest. The ability to pull multiple re
Thanks for your input, Dave. My concern is the processing overhead that is
incurred by using CFSTOREDPROC. Do you know of any way to access multiple
recordsets in CFQUERY? As it stands now, CFQUERY only returns the 1st recordset
while ignoring the rest. The ability to pull multiple recordsets, i
Office of Research
Office of Graduate Studies
University of California, Irvine
http://www.rgs.uci.edu/
949.824.6363
-Original Message-
From: Paul Ihrig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 10:35 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: cfstoredproc vs cfquery
ok...
question
edexpo.com
-Original Message-
From: Paul Ihrig
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Thu Feb 22 18:34:49 2007
Subject: Re: cfstoredproc vs cfquery
ok...
question.
i have always used a stored proc to initally grab my data set.
but then use cfquery to re-sort the data as well as page though it..
i am not that qu
Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com
-Original Message-
From: Ian Skinner
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Thu Feb 22 18:12:12 2007
Subject: RE: cfstoredproc vs cfquery
I've found that they work really well together. I generally develop an app
with cfquery, and change them all to cfstoredproc
ok...
question.
i have always used a stored proc to initally grab my data set.
but then use cfquery to re-sort the data as well as page though it..
i am not that quick at dba stuff, but is the way you guys do it?
or do you pass your sort orders & paging back to the proc..
thx
~~
I've found that they work really well together. I generally develop an app with
cfquery, and change them all to cfstoredproc before I put it into production.
I just want to point out that the topic of this thread is that one can CALL
simple stored procedures with tags, so what is the ramificati
9.824.6363
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 9:44 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: cfstoredproc vs cfquery
> Anyone know if there is an advantage either way when it comes
> to calling a stored procedure?
In the example you provi
> Anyone know if there is an advantage either way when it comes
> to calling a stored procedure?
In the example you provided, there's no difference, but stored procedures
can be much more complex than a single SQL statement. Stored procedures can
return multiple recordsets, they can accept and re
TED]
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 11:31 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: cfstoredproc vs cfquery
None come to mind that can't be executed via cfquery. What do you mean
by more complex?
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.1
None come to mind that can't be executed via cfquery. What do you mean by
more complex?
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/697 - Release Date: 2/22/2007
11:55 AM
The only one I can think of, but then I don't use SP's very often; IIRC is that
the tag can handle more complex procedures.
--
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.BloodSource.org
Sacramento, CA
-
| 1 | |
- Binary Sudoku
| | |
-
"C code. C c
PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:45 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFStoredProc vs CFQUERY
The quick difference between the and is you can deal
with multiple recordset returned from the stored procedure which was not
possible using .With you can deal with the return
values from the stored
The quick difference between the and is you can deal
with multiple recordset returned from the stored procedure which was not
possible using .With you can deal with the return
values from the stored procedures.
The Only drawback I see using is it can not handle the varbinary
data which i
ginal Message -
From: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 1:01 AM
Subject: RE: CFStoredProc vs CFQuery
Yeah if you must cache, then use CFQUERY but you can also just duplicate
the
results into a new query object and cache that.
_
Fro
Yeah if you must cache, then use CFQUERY but you can also just duplicate the
results into a new query object and cache that.
_
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 29 September 2004 20:35
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFStoredProc vs CFQuery
> Are there any benefits to call
I think the best part of CFSTOREDPROC is the ability to return multiple
recordsets. You could run a stored procedure that runs 4 queries and
keep track of them separately.
Joe
_
From: Duane Boudreau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 2:59 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subje
> Are there any benefits to calling stored procedures using
> CFStoredProc vs. CFQuery? All the stored procs return a
> single record set.
>
> The limitation I am running in to is how to cache the results
> of a query that is created calling CFStoredProc.
In this case, I'd recommend using CFQU
What are the disadvantages of putting them into a shared scope?
-Adam
- Original Message -
From: Tangorre, Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:07:34 -0400
Subject: RE: CFStoredProc vs CFQuery
To: CF-Talk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The major benefit of using cfquer
The major benefit of using cfquery to call is that you can cache the
results. There are no cachedwithin or cachedafter attributes in
cfstoredproc (which I think MM should address!!!). The only way to cache
the results is to put them into a shared scope or use QoQ... Which is a
waste.. Just use cfqu
> stored proc is definately faster because everytime you use
> cfquery, the sql inside the tag has to be interpreted to the
> language the dataserver understands...with cfstoredproc this
> step is skipped.
The problem with generalizations is that they're usually not always correct.
That's true
From: Justin Greene
To: CF-Talk
Sent: 1/29/02 6:42 PM
Subject: RE: CFStoredProc vs CFQUERY
Do not know about speed, but access to output parameters and the
ability to
trap an error (i.e. detect that an error code was returned) are in
themselves worth it.
Justin
> -Original Message-
> F
To: CF-Talk
> > Subject: Re: CFStoredProc vs CFQUERY
> >
> > Thanks for the info, does anyone know if one is faster than the
>other?
> >
> > Steve
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Shawn Grover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> &g
11:01 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: CFStoredProc vs CFQUERY
>
> Thanks for the info, does anyone know if one is faster than the
other?
>
> Steve
> - Original Message -
> From: "Shawn Grover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMA
Thanks for the info, does anyone know if one is faster than the other?
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Shawn Grover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 8:29 PM
Subject: RE: CFStoredProc vs CFQUE
Use the CFPROCRESULT name="MyQueryObject" inside the CFSTOREDPROC
tags
(normally the last one specified)...
Using cfstoredproc tags eliminates a bunch of errors - in the CFQuery
call,
how do you know the Date is a proper format? the cfprocparam tags
handle
any neccessary conversion (within re
To access results from a cfstoredproc you would use
Whenever I use a stored procedure I call it with a cfquery.
I'm not sure if there are any performance differences, but it's just
easier to use a cfquery.
__
steve oliver
cresco technologies, inc.
http:/
28 matches
Mail list logo
