SP2. The work around is to
route your CF Admin Datasource connection through an MS ODBC socket, whatever
that is... instructions can be found here:
http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/webforums/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=6threadid=934725enterthread=y
Then in the Railo server Administrator, Create
Interesting, I've always thought that CF connections to a database should/could
be improved:
http://david.low.me.uk/2007/06/25/another-cfml-speed-contest/
Andrew.
~|
Get involved in the latest ColdFusion discussions, product
Yeah, thats what I figured too Brain.
You are still sending an SQL statement to the database
CF still has to check for a connection to the db server and open one if
required
CF still has to wait for the data to come back
So the factor from CF side of things is how quickly it can get the SQL
Interesting, I've always thought that CF connections to a
database should/could be improved:
http://david.low.me.uk/2007/06/25/another-cfml-speed-contest/
This test appears to be a sequential set of requests. Unless you're only
going to have one request at a time in your application, tests
, the tests were indeed run as
concurrent, under load tests. My own observations were definitely not done in
any kind of scientific manner, I just ran my application on CF8 versus Railo
with the same MySQL database and had about a 4-to-5-fold decrease in run times
on average. I've run into some
I posted this but it hasn't been published:
=
Itâs hardly fair to post a set of performance benchmarks without full open
disclosure, including everything needed to reproduce the test results.
Please post all this and I can promise you the CF team will respond (I run it).
Thanks!
Actually it has (I had comment pre-moderation turned on, without
realising) - Damon, I've left you an email too.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I posted this but it hasn't been published:
=
Itâs hardly fair to post a set of performance benchmarks without full open
Interesting, I've always thought that CF connections to a database should be
improved:
http://david.low.me.uk/2007/06/25/another-cfml-speed-contest/
Andrew.
~|
ColdFusion 8 beta - Build next generation apps
today, with easy
Actually, in my experience using stored procedures provides negligible speed
improvements over cfquery. This is due to the fact that modern databases
cache execution plans and support prepared statements. There are reasons one
might want to use stored procedures, but speed increases over cfquery
Interesting, I've always thought that CF connections to a database should
be improved:
That cool, but any speed issues with CFQUERY are easily overcome by using
stored procedures. Been trying to move the them as much as possible.
Robert B. Harrison
Director of Interactive services
Austin
Interesting, I've always thought that CF connections to a database should be
improved:
I've been doing some testing with the Railo 2 beta as well to see how well
CFWebstore ran on it, and was likewise thrilled with how fast it is. Blazing
fast! I'm going to continue testing to make sure
I disagree with this in this market.
Railo could go open-source, but it wouldn't make much difference
apart from perception.
This community (I am sorry if I offend anybody) doesn't have the
number of people that can program in Java yet. I have had a few
people offer to help with CFEclipse
don't want this to happen to Railo. In the Java world nobody
cares about CF. So why should a really good programmer dig into our code
for error checking etc.
Gert
Mark Drew schrieb:
I disagree with this in this market.
Railo could go open-source, but it wouldn't make much difference
apart from
in Railo hosting?
Indeed, and you always will as in all reality it will be Adobe who define
the CFML language (albeit not official) and any competing engine will
always be behind that set. Of course there are times when new systems
provide additional functionality but any one expecting CFML
Railo) but there is alot of other stuff such as failover, load balancing,
clustering flash integration that are going to be big players in people
making a switch, unless you are talking about the mom pop clients. There
is indeed alot of growing room for these two competitors. I really do not
care what
I agree, thank you Andy.
We first plan to buy Adobe and then Microsoft, if they don't implement
some of our features :-)
We will adapt everything the market needs in order to make switches from
another engine to Railo as easy as possible.
Large CMS like Contens, a sophisticated MachII
On Thursday 08 Feb 2007, Andy Matthews wrote:
Adobe and Macromedia ALWAYS leapfrogged each other in features until of
course Adobe bought MM. There's no reason why Adobe can't implement
features from other engines.
cough
cfthread
cfinterface
...
--
Tom Chiverton
Helping to confidentially
At least CFC instances can't be replicated by underlying J2EE platform since
they can't implement serializable interface.
there. (If you need session replication at least). Also, from what I've
been told, session replication doesn't work reliably with CF, although I
have not experienced
less expensive you might have a case, but it's
marginally less expensive with less features.
Regards
Dale Fraser
-Original Message-
From: Gert Franz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 7 February 2007 6:18 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Hi all
Just a tiny hint is this...
http://www.markdrew.co.uk/blog/index.cfm/2006/11/27/Comparing-Component-speed-on-different-CFML-engines
Greetings / Grüsse
Gert Franz
Customer Care
Railo Technologies GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.railo.ch
Join our Mailing List / Treten Sie unserer Mailingliste bei
Well, this is by no means an indicator of how well or bad CF/Railo performs
on the whole with components/structures, there are far too many factors not
accounted for and in the authors own words, should be taken with a pinch of
salt and are not scientific.
For one, it was on a Mac and I doubt
Hi Dale,
here my comments to your concerns:
1. security
Railo does not claim to be absolutely secure in terms of weaknesses or
security holes. Nor do we claim to be more secure than other engines in
this terms. But just give me your thoughts about these matters:
How do you prevent users from
would encourage such a test, but I won't do it myself. My quote about
performance is just something our customers and as well we seem to see.
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) schrieb:
Well, this is by no means an indicator of how well or bad CF/Railo performs
on the whole with components/structures
Indeed, so if I said ColdFusion was faster than Railo at everything then
there would be just as much basis in that - this is my point. I am not
putting Railo down in any way, I will never use it, but to say it is faster
just on observation is just wrong unless backed up by proper tests
unheard of, I have no such issues
convincing businesses to spend 10k on Adobe products however.
Regards
Dale Fraser
-Original Message-
From: Gert Franz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 7 February 2007 7:51 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Hi Dale
Well Dale, the question was about hosting :-)
Railo will make it's way. I'm sure, but it will take time...
Gert
Dale Fraser schrieb:
Hey gert,
All those items you list are only relevant to hosting providers, most users
don't do this, a very small percentage. I use it in a corporate
I hope somewhen you will revert the statement I will never use it :-)
Why don't you observe it yoursef?
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) schrieb:
Indeed, so if I said ColdFusion was faster than Railo at everything then
there would be just as much basis in that - this is my point. I am not
putting
expressed within this
communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions.
Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com
-Original Message-
From: Gert Franz
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Wed Feb 07 09:18:35 2007
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
I hope somewhen you
Gert Franz said:
I read all the posts from you guys saying that there should be no
reason to host Railo since it is only compatible to version MX 6.1.
And you know you are absolutely right, if you do not care for:
- security
I don't care about security as long as my part in the whole
On 2/7/07, Gert Franz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Neil,
i can easily post why this is:
Railo, for a good reason which I will post down below does not support
the following.
1: cfset a = structNew()
2: cfset a[sub.subkey] = John
3: cfset b = a.sub.subkey --- this throwhs an error
For what it's worth, if Railo went open source.. now *THAT* would be
interesting...
~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7
Experience Flex 2 MX7 integration create powerful cross-platform RIAs
http:http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk
That indeed was and is true. But since changes could be easily be made,
I don't agree to change the behaviour of Railo in order to support this
syntax and loose performance in exchange.
Gert
Rick Root schrieb:
On 2/7/07, Gert Franz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Neil,
i can easily post
why? what's the difference between open source and free?
Rick Root schrieb:
For what it's worth, if Railo went open source.. now *THAT* would be
interesting...
~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7
Experience Flex 2 MX7
Rick Root wrote:
For what it's worth, if Railo went open source.. now *THAT* would be
interesting...
The combination of a open source shared hosting optimized CF runtime
is where I see some possibilities. Perhaps if one of the big hosting
companies (HMS or GoDaddy seem like likely
Not much when you have a decompiler on hand :-) Oops, did I say that out loud?
On 2/7/07, Gert Franz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
why? what's the difference between open source and free?
Rick Root schrieb:
For what it's worth, if Railo went open source.. now *THAT* would be
interesting
and that it takes
longer for community acceptance.
Doug B.
- Original Message -
From: Gert Franz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 7:15 AM
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
why? what's the difference between open source
lol ;)
Doug B.
- Original Message -
From: James Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 7:28 AM
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Not much when you have a decompiler on hand :-) Oops, did I say that out
loud
Hah! h4x0r! ;o)
Rey...
James Holmes wrote:
Not much when you have a decompiler on hand :-) Oops, did I say that out loud?
On 2/7/07, Gert Franz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
why? what's the difference between open source and free?
Rick Root schrieb:
For what it's worth, if Railo went open
Doug Brown said:
A huge difference!! Number one is that you have the entire community
helping to develop the project,
Really? Look at that thread about the Smith project. How many people
have said they would actually help?
Jochem
Doug Brown wrote:
MySql offers an open source product and were able to grow their client base
while at the same time having the people that downloaded their software also
develop their software and reduce their costs. Free and closed source simply
means that we have to wait for you to implemnt
@houseoffusion.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 7:51 AM
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Doug Brown said:
A huge difference!! Number one is that you have the entire community
helping to develop the project,
Really? Look at that thread about the Smith project. How many people
have
-
From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 9:51 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Doug Brown said:
A huge difference!! Number one is that you have the entire community
helping to develop the project,
Really? Look
Most CF people don't have a CS background
Where did you get this info from?
-Original Message-
From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 9:59 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
How many people on this list are actually
: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 7:58 AM
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Doug Brown wrote:
MySql offers an open source product and were able to grow their client
base
while at the same time having the people that downloaded their software
also
develop their software and reduce
Railo and we would be faster in some cases than other
vendors, they could easily adapt our code
And just like James posted. If you have a decompiler etc. it is already
open source.
Greetings / Grüsse
Gert Franz
Customer Care
Railo Technologies GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.railo.ch
Join our Mailing
up a poll somewhere and test out this hypothesis?
Russ
-Original Message-
From: Turetsky, Seth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:11 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Most CF people don't have a CS background
Where did
If we open source Railo and we would be faster in some cases than other
vendors, they could easily adapt our code
Sure they could adopt your code and make their product faster, but they
would also still be charging a wholloping price for their product.
Doug B.
- Original Message
Just a side note, or question...What reasons do people think that asp/php
has the stronghold on web development, and what can be done to make CF just
as popular?
A. Better performing code
B. Cheaper development
C. Cheaper hosting
D. Other (Explain)
Doug
That's my point...
Thanks Doug...
Doug Brown schrieb:
If we open source Railo and we would be faster in some cases than other
vendors, they could easily adapt our code
Sure they could adopt your code and make their product faster, but they
would also still be charging a wholloping
still
have a enterprise edition that you charge for albeit at a lower price.
Doug B.
- Original Message -
From: Gert Franz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 8:32 AM
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
That's my
, 2007 10:16 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Just in general working and talking with CF people and at conferences. It
seems to me that because CF is so easy to learn, a lot of the people using it
are coming from non CS backgrounds. Now it might be just people I'm
]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:30 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Just a side note, or question...What reasons do people think that asp/php
has the stronghold on web development, and what can be done to make CF
just
as popular?
A. Better performing
, February 07, 2007 8:16 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
why? what's the difference between open source and free?
Rick Root schrieb:
For what it's worth, if Railo went open source.. now *THAT* would be
interesting
, February 07, 2007 10:30 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Just a side note, or question...What reasons do people think that
asp/php
has the stronghold on web development, and what can be done to make CF
just
as popular?
A. Better performing code
B. Cheaper
But that's the thing Gert...
If you DO open source it, nothing would change on your end except that
people who WANT to get involved COULD get involved. So even if no one
decided to help out, you wouldn't be losing anything. And you never
know...people could jump on board and Railo could get
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 9:30 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Just a side note, or question...What reasons do people think that asp/php
has the stronghold on web development, and what can be done to make CF just
as popular
Andy Matthews said:
Open source means you're offering up the source code for anyone to
modify. It also means that when someone modifies your source code,
they have to give it back to the community (you) for others to use.
No it doesn't. Even the most viral licenses for software only require
I also think that while there's a decent amount of KICKING CF projects,
there needs to be WAY more, and they need to be way better publicized. Look
at the stuff that 37 Signals is doing. They're totally piggybacking on the
popularity of Rails and offering up this fantastic software that just
Okay...thanks for correcting me Jochem. I didn't realize the difference.
-Original Message-
From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:39 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Andy Matthews said:
Open source means
On 2/7/07, Eric Haskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and neither is that fact that ASP/PHP code is more
complicated and therefore will have more bugs.
That's a fairly ridiculous assertion -- first of all that one specific
language is more complicated than another and second that complexity =
bugs.
them.
Russ
-Original Message-
From: Doug Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:30 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Just a side note, or question...What reasons do people think that asp/php
has the stronghold on web
-Original Message-
From: John Paul Ashenfelter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:28 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
On 2/7/07, Eric Haskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and neither is that fact that ASP/PHP code is more
On 2/7/07, Andy Matthews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Open source means you're offering up the source code for anyone to modify.
It also means that when someone modifies your source code, they have to
give
it back to the community (you) for others to use.
Depends on the license. I use the BSD
-Original Message-
From: Jordan Michaels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:40 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Russ wrote:
I don't think PHP has any sort of session management, so it's not even a
contender
I don't think anyone is saying that PHP is more or less prone to bugs
because it's open. PHP (the language) has its own bugs/CF has it's own, but
I wasn't talking about the bugs in the language itself. I was talking about
bugs in the code. CF is so simple, that a lot of non-technical people
I was talking about bugs in code too -- SQL injection, XSS,
bad logic, etc. And I'd argue personally and professionally
using dozens of sites I've been hired to work on as a basis,
that since CF *is* so simple, it's more likely that there are
deadly bugs in the code -- even now, years
On 2/7/07, Dave Watts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Escaping quotes does make SQL injection a little harder, but far from
impossible.
cfparam name=url.id default=0; delete from myTable;
cfquery ...
select * from myTable where id=#url.id#
/cfquery
If I'm not mistaken - that would only work in
cfparam name=url.id default=0; delete from myTable;
cfquery ... select * from myTable where id=#url.id# /cfquery
If I'm not mistaken - that would only work in SQL Server, right?
cuz only SQL server lets you pass through multiple queries
all at once.
Well, it's a bit more complicated
Yikes, wasn't expecting this big a response! (If only it was full of people
saying YES!)
Matt Quackenbush wrote:
At the risk of sounding like a complete [EMAIL PROTECTED]!, why would
anyone want to go
backwards and use Railo? I mean, it's still not even compatible with CF
MX. I'm sure
Will you be waiting for version 1.1?
I believe that will be very close to Adobe CF 7
I'll be going with the latest stable release. Whether that starts of being 1.1
depends on how soon that is released and how long it takes to get myself sorted.
If I'm ready before 1.1 then I'll start with 1.0
You can read the full thing here: http://blog.bpsite.net/index.
php/Why%20Railo.html?itemid=24
Ooops, URL got chopped. Should be everything inside the brackets...
[ http://blog.bpsite.net/index.php/Why%20Railo.html?itemid=24 ]
There are plenty of reasons to use Railo, but before I get
into that, can you give an example of an important CFMX
feature that Railo lacks?
Flash Remoting?
Event Gateway?
Recordsets from stored procedures?
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software
from stored procedures?
Fair enough.
Not something I've needed in my personal stuff, but we do use them at work, and
it'd probably be a pain trying to solve it without cfstoredproc.
There are plenty of reasons to use Railo, but before I get
into that, can you give an example of an important CFMX
Flash Remoting
is supported by Railo 1.0. But only the calls to .cfm files. A AMF
Filter is included. Railo 1.1
Event gateways:
we won't implement this feature yet. We need to leave arguments for
others :-)
Recordsets from stored procedures:
In 1.0 it is possible to call stored procedures
Sorry Railo 1.1 will support calls to .cfc's as well...
Gert Franz schrieb:
Flash Remoting
is supported by Railo 1.0. But only the calls to .cfm files. A AMF
Filter is included. Railo 1.1
Event gateways:
we won't implement this feature yet. We need to leave arguments for
others
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Wed Feb 07 22:52:30 2007
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Flash Remoting
is supported by Railo 1.0. But only the calls to .cfm files. A AMF
Filter is included. Railo 1.1
Event gateways:
we won't implement this feature yet. We need to leave arguments for
others
In 1.0 it is possible to call stored procedures in cfquery. Railo 1.1
will support cfstoredproc*
I thought that was the case, but I did a quick test with MySQL 5 and it didn't
appear to work.
The procedure was just a sample one I found:
CREATE PROCEDURE molo() SELECT 'Molo';
And when trying
For stored procedure Railo has
cfstoredproc*
Just like Adobe CFMX
from online help
!--- This view-only example executes a Sybase stored procedure that
returns three result sets, two of which we want. The stored
procedure returns the status code and one output parameter,
which we display. We
Hello.
In a month or two I'll be getting a dedicated server, and I've had a
thought: maybe I should go for the next server spec up, get Railo
Enterprise, and offer Railo hosting.
(for those unaware of what Railo is, it's a really excellent CFML engine,
better than all other CFML engines
At the risk of sounding like a complete [EMAIL PROTECTED]!, why would anyone
want to go
backwards and use Railo? I mean, it's still not even compatible with CF
MX. I'm sure I speak for an extremely high percentage of CFers out there
when I say, Thank God we're not in the pre-MX days anymore
: Wednesday, 7 February 2007 1:00 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
At the risk of sounding like a complete [EMAIL PROTECTED]!, why would anyone
want to go
backwards and use Railo? I mean, it's still not even compatible with CF
MX. I'm sure I speak for an extremely high
No comment...
Doug B.
- Original Message -
From: Dale Fraser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 7:27 PM
Subject: RE: Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
I agree, unless your giving it away, I wouldn't pay for hosting
Will you be waiting for version 1.1?
I believe that will be very close to Adobe CF 7
On 2/7/07, Peter Boughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
In a month or two I'll be getting a dedicated server, and I've had a
thought: maybe I should go for the next server spec up, get Railo
Enterprise
, but only because BlueDragon 6.2 is almost completely
compatible with CFMX 6.1 - and most of the stuff I write for the open source
world, I try to make compatible with Bluedragon - and it's not that
difficult.
As for Railo... I've never worked with it, but I know that Gert has sent me
changes
Hi all together,
I read all the posts from you guys saying that there should be no reason
to host Railo since it is only compatible to version MX 6.1. And you
know you are absolutely right, if you do not care for:
- security
- performance
- price
Why do people still start new hosting
I dunno, CF4.5 and CF5 were solid. MX was crap in every way, 6.1 and up...
Solid again.
But yeah, I am not sure how anyone can say that Railo is better than any
other CFML engine in every way?!
This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant,
Richmond, Surrey, TW9
for CFFM because CFFM out of the box doesn't work with Railo.
Who's fault is that? Does CFFM work on ColdFusion and BD with no changes?
Surely if it is CFML then it should be Adobe based CFML as the benchmark,
guide.
N
This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant
Hi Neil,
i can easily post why this is:
Railo, for a good reason which I will post down below does not support
the following.
1: cfset a = structNew()
2: cfset a[sub.subkey] = John
3: cfset b = a.sub.subkey --- this throwhs an error
since a does not contain a key named sub. It just contains
Interesting, surely you should get Adobe to change ColdFusion to be as fast
as Railo (though I haven't seen or used Railo so I would have take your work
that it is faster!)
This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant,
Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DN, United Kingdom
Hi all,
if you like to have a look at our recently started blog.
Just go to http://www.railo.ch/blog
If you have any comments or suggestions, just let us know.
--
Greetings / Grüsse
Gert Franz
Railo development
Railo Technologies GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.railo.ch
Join our Mailing List
Well Railo is at the moment nearly MX 6.1 compatible. With the release of 1.1
it will be nearly MX 7.02 compatible. And it will include some of the features
thought for CFMX 8 and BD 8. Like Server surveylance. And of course much more.
So i think, regarding performance, pricing and flexibility
Message-
From: Gert Franz
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Mon Sep 04 09:09:56 2006
Subject: Re: Getting started with Railo
Well Railo is at the moment nearly MX 6.1 compatible. With the release of
1.1 it will be nearly MX 7.02 compatible. And it will include some of the
features thought for CFMX 8 and BD 8. Like
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote:
Can Railo seriously compete in the ColdFusion market? What with BD (I think)
and ColdFusion already hitting version 7 - with 8 not too far off, and Railo
not even 6.1 compatible yet, doesn't it seem a lot of effort for no gain?
I pretty much only use Railo
Well Adobe is way beyond our scale. You could compare our size to half as big
as BD. But we definitely want to grow beyond that.
A list of prices of Railo you can find here:
http://www.railo.ch/en/index.cfm?treeID=137
There are a lot of features Railo has, that none of the other engines support
| There are a lot of features Railo has, that none of the other engines
| support.
| - Like Jochem wrote separating Webs logically on a dedicated server is
| one of them.
| - Deploying Railo Application as easy to customize archives
| - permanent use of JSP taglibs
| - writing of own tag
webroot. Just use the
local administrator to configure your local settings and the server
administrator for the global ones.
Cheers Gert
| There are a lot of features Railo has, that none of the other
engines
| support.
| - Like Jochem wrote separating Webs logically on a dedicated server
| Yes, you ar right. If you have a better name for it, just let me know.
| With the term web we mean a webroot. A folder containing web files.
| In fact it is not the same as a virtual host, since many virtual hosts
| can point to the same webroot.
| But you can separate all the settings for
Ditto...
-Original Message-
From: Hugo Ahlenius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 7:54 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Getting started with Railo
| Yes, you ar right. If you have a better name for it, just let me know.
| With the term web we mean a webroot
Hi again,
I added a paragraph in the FAQ section concerning Railo webs. I hope it is
comprehensive.
http://www.railo.ch/en/index.cfm?treeID=139
I hope it clarifies the confusion about webs.
Gert
~|
Introducing the Fusion
So I take it RAILO is like Bluedragon, it is another CFML application server
that runs on top of a J2EE server like JRUN, and not an addon for Coldfusion
?
-Original Message-
From: Gert Franz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 04 September 2006 14:11
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Getting
301 - 400 of 421 matches
Mail list logo
