--Original Message-
From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 5:02 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
> I'll preface this by saying that I have no experience using
> virtualization in a production environment,
Jon,
Appreciate the response. However, I don't believe the problems
were identical. Your's seemed to be CFMail sending out multiple
copies of an email, while mine is file fragments randomly
appearing in email headers and bodies. Thanks anyway for the thought.
Dave Jones
NetEffect
At 03:51 PM
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 6:19 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
> > I think it would have to. Machines ARE all different
> > even if you
> For example Local Director has a the ability to "see"
> how busy a server is and to check its status. I would
> assume other infrastructure gear does the same thing
> (up-time monitors and such). If they all work at the
> IP level then they should work just fine, if they don't
> then I'm not
> I'll preface this by saying that I have no experience using virtualization
> in a production environment, yet, although I use it a lot for testing and
> other non-production uses.
>
> > At the very least there's licensing issues - there may also
> > be "hardware" issues - remember that you must
Dave,
I have had the EXACT same problem. You can read through my thread I posted
many moons ago at:
http://webforums.macromedia.com/coldfusion/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=
275669&highlight_key=y
We ended up writing our own mail tag implementation that we call
like this:
Its not a feature,
I'll preface this by saying that I have no experience using virtualization
in a production environment, yet, although I use it a lot for testing and
other non-production uses.
> At the very least there's licensing issues - there may also
> be "hardware" issues - remember that you must find driver
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2003 11:13 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
> > It's very easy after a somewhat involved gearing up phase
> > (dec
> It's very easy after a somewhat involved gearing up phase
> (deciding what goes in the image and so forth).
I don't see how that's any more complicated than setting up a single
dedicated server without virtualization.
> After that you've definitely got more costs with the VPS -
> licensing is
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2003 11:24 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
> > I mentioned that as well actually... and an isolated
> > instance of
> I mentioned that as well actually... and an isolated
> instance of CF is MUCH cheaper to install and maintain
> than a VPS.
I'm not convinced on either of these points. It's very easy to deploy
virtual servers, and you don't have to worry about one of them screwing up
the rest.
Dave Watts, CT
Gee, my brush with fame! ;-)
Dave Jones
NetEffect
At 04:19 PM 7/3/03 -0400, you wrote:
>Dave,
>
>Thanks for starting this thread. I know it ended up in a whole different
>place, but it got me thinking, and fed my blog today. :-)
>
>http://www.forta.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=e&entry=855
>
>--- Ben
> -Original Message-
> From: Ryan Kime [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 5:41 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
> You also have to look at what the market will bear. You will most likely
> be
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 4:46 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
>
> Point taken! :-)
>
> Yes, there is an 80MB or so hit per instance. It is not for every little
> site, no question about it.
>
>
>
&
Ben Forta wrote:
> Point taken! :-)
>
> Yes, there is an 80MB or so hit per instance. It is not for every little
> site, no question about it.
I think CF MX is geting to the point where the relevant question is not
whether it is suited for *every* little site, but whether it is suited
for *any*
profit after expenses.
-Original Message-
From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 4:29 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
I don't know - it seems like more hosts offering VPS are limiting themselves
to 4 inst
hether the market will respond to it.
Jim Davis
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 5:25 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
> > I agree. For hundreds of sites,
> I agree. For hundreds of sites, nope. For a fewer number,
> yes. I expect that we'll soon start seeing both offered,
> depending on what you need (and what you'll pay for).
I don't know; it seems that there's little room for it to be a viable shared
hosting solution. If you have the kind of ma
03 5:09 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
> Yes, there is an 80MB or so hit per instance. It is not for
> every little site, no question about it.
It doesn't seem at all suitable for a shared hosting environment, which
is what Jochem's gettin
> Yes, there is an 80MB or so hit per instance. It is not for
> every little site, no question about it.
It doesn't seem at all suitable for a shared hosting environment, which is
what Jochem's getting at, I think.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
voice: (202) 797-5496
Point taken! :-)
Yes, there is an 80MB or so hit per instance. It is not for every little
site, no question about it.
-Original Message-
From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 4:39 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CrystalTech says ALL variables
Ben Forta wrote:
>
> Regardless, it is worth noting that problems caused by the lack of
> locking (CF4.x and CF5) can be slow and gradual. On a shared box you may
> see memory corruption problems (do to the lack of locking) even if your
> app has no shared scope variables at all. How? If another a
Dave,
Thanks for starting this thread. I know it ended up in a whole different
place, but it got me thinking, and fed my blog today. :-)
http://www.forta.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=e&entry=855
--- Ben
-Original Message-
From: Dave Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 03,
-- Original Message --
From: Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I've been with CT for several years now and until this last
>episode have had nothing but good experiences. However, the past
>few days have been a completely different story. My emails to
>suppo
RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
>
> Ok... so how is locking ap vars going to prevent that??
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 1:03 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech sa
--Original Message-
> From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 2:23 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
> Why would you save a CC number in the application scope? Typically this
> would be session speci
You should NOT be saving any user data in the application scope - that's not
what it's for anyway.
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Small [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 1:19 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
Ok... so how is locking ap vars going to prevent that??
-Original Message-
From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 1:03 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
I think they are referring to this way of 'ste
At 01:25 PM 7/3/03 -0500, Raymond Camden wrote:
>Depends. If you don't disable cffile/cfdirectory, I can look around and
>find your application name. If you enable client variables, I'm pretty
>sure I can search for that in the registry. If your app ever threw any
>errors, I could look in the log f
2003 2:25 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
Your CF instance is shared. Stuff in SERVER (which you generally should
not be using anyway) is shared by all applications. Stuff in APPLCIATION
is shared by all instances of the same . Stuff in
SESSION is sha
, July 03, 2003 2:16 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
At 02:09 PM 7/3/03 -0400, Ben Forta wrote:
>I assumed that too. But locking will not prevent that. Nothing will. If
>two apps have the same application name then they share scopes, simple
>as
ssage-
From: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 2:10 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
I assumed that too. But locking will not prevent that. Nothing will. If
two apps have the same application name then they share sc
>
> At 02:09 PM 7/3/03 -0400, Ben Forta wrote:
> >I assumed that too. But locking will not prevent that.
> Nothing will. If
> >two apps have the same application name then they share
> scopes, simple
> >as that.
>
> I hadn't thought of that - would it be prudent when running
> CF5 on a share
com
> >1-866-239-4678
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Dave Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 1:20 PM
> >To: CF-Talk
> >Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
> >
> &
ly it is." - Yoda
> -Original Message-
> From: Matthew Small [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:19 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
>
> So are you saying that all I have to do to get an
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Doom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:30 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
> And I'm wondering what kind of performance their shared servers are going
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:23 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
> Hi,
> I'm trying to resolve a problem for an application hosted at
> CrystalTech which sporadically starts s
At 02:09 PM 7/3/03 -0400, Ben Forta wrote:
>I assumed that too. But locking will not prevent that. Nothing will. If
>two apps have the same application name then they share scopes, simple
>as that.
I hadn't thought of that - would it be prudent when running CF5 on a shared
server to give your app
--Original Message-
> From: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:10 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
>
> I assumed that too. But locking will not prevent that.
> Nothing will. If two apps have th
At 12:46 PM 7/3/03 -0400, Dan Phillips wrote:
>Yes shared variables. If not, other sites can steal them and it makes
>for a very fun possible server crash. However, we have only had to tell
>people to use CFLOCK if their site was not well coeded and they are
>generating lots of traffic.
How do you
PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 2:10 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
I assumed that too. But locking will not prevent that. Nothing will. If
two apps have the same application name then they share scopes, simple
as that.
Unless you are running mu
At 10:19 AM 7/3/03 -0700, Dave Jones wrote:
>Dan,
>The emails are going out when supposed to, but occasionally are
>scrambled with junk data, in both the header and body. Mail going
>out with CDONTS does not exhibit the problem. At some point,
>CFMAIL stopped working altogether, and when the servic
: Thursday, July 03, 2003 2:03 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
I think they are referring to this way of 'stealing' data:
All this will do is copy over the other app's application data. I
_think_ I wrote a UDF for this on cflib.org.
Defintely
ally it is." - Yoda
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 11:39 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
>
> >> If not, other sites can steal them
>
>
; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 2:12 PM
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
> Scott,
> I've been with CT for several years now and until this last
> episode have had nothing but good experiences. However, the past
> few days hav
Scott,
I've been with CT for several years now and until this last
episode have had nothing but good experiences. However, the past
few days have been a completely different story. My emails to
support are often ignored and the techs I've communicated with
all repeat the same story (i.e. the pr
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:47 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
Yes shared variables. If not, other sites can steal them and it makes
for a very fun possible server crash. However, we have only had to tell
people to use CFL
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 1:59 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
Dan,
During the time the problem was occurring, I created a test
script that contained nothing but a CFMAIL tag and CDONTS script.
No variables were used. The emal sent with the CFMAIL ta
pposed to go out?
> >
> >Dan Phillips
> >www.CFXHosting.com
> >1-866-239-4678
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >-----Original Message-
> >From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:19 PM
> >To: CF-Talk
> &
Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:19 PM
>To: CF-Talk
>Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
>
>It's bunk. They are saying you need to lock local
-
From: Dan Phillips [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:29 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
We prefer that clients use them but do not force the issue.
Is the application sending email when it's not supposed to or just
se
-- Original Message --
From: "Raymond Camden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>It's bunk. They are saying you need to lock local variables? I'd worry
>about their support staff if they thought that.
I've had an experience with CT support recently where I could tell that
L PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:19 PM
>To: CF-Talk
>Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
>
>
>It's bunk. They are saying you need to lock local variables? I'd worry
>about their support staff if they thought that.
>
>===
July 03, 2003 12:34 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
> We prefer that clients use them but do not force the issue.
Yea but you mean for shared variables, right? I assume you aren't
agreeing with CT and their statement that _local_ vars be locke
> We prefer that clients use them but do not force the issue.
Yea but you mean for shared variables, right? I assume you aren't
agreeing with CT and their statement that _local_ vars be locked (IF
that is what they meant - this all could be miscommunication).
D]
: Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:19 PM
: To: CF-Talk
: Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
:
:
: It's bunk. They are saying you need to lock local variables? I'd worry
: about their support staff i
amden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:19 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked
It's bunk. They are saying you need to lock local variables? I'd worry
about their support staff if th
It's bunk. They are saying you need to lock local variables? I'd worry
about their support staff if they thought that.
===
Raymond Camden, ColdFusion Jedi Master for Mindseye, Inc
(www.mindseye.com)
Member of Team Macromedia
58 matches
Mail list logo
