Barney,
>From reading your post, your solution sounds more like a global UDF
whose methods are called with the data stored in the client scope than a
true flyweight pattern (e.g., a shared, type-specific object for all
users).
But after reading this thread we were testing some ideas.
All of o
> Can you clarify what you mean by "shared" CFC instance? Do you mean in
> the application scope?
>
> If so, do you then lock each call to the shared CFC method?
Yeah, or perhaps a CFC created on the fly (which obviously isn't
really shared). The point is that the CFC instance isn't tied to the
Thanks, Dave! I was able to find what I needed to know with your reply.
_
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 5:32 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Session-Based CFC Usage Across Clusters
> So to keep from having to re-write my applications
> So to keep from having to re-write my applications, I would
> need to ensure that Win2k3 NLB supports sticky sessions and
> that the feature enabled? I'm new to NLB, but I'll dig
> around this weekend.
NLB in Windows Server 2003 supports sticky sessions, they're called "single
affinity" with
PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Session-Based CFC Usage Across Clusters
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:42:18 -0500, Dawson, Michael
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have read that session-based CFCs cannot be clustered
(according to a
> livedoc comment).
Session-based CFCs cannot be replicated
>Where you'd call a method on your
> session-scoped CFC, we call a method on a shared CFC instance, passing
> in the client variable structure, which represents the state that your
> session CFC would have in instance variables.
Can you clarify what you mean by "shared" CFC instance? Do you me
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:42:18 -0500, Dawson, Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have read that session-based CFCs cannot be clustered (according to a
> livedoc comment).
Session-based CFCs cannot be replicated in CFMX 6.1 but you do not
require session replication in order to build a cluster.
m
>If you decided to focus on clustering and not use session-bases CFCs,
>how did you implement your processes?
The general strategy for implementing across a cluster is to move data from the session scope to the client scope. There are limitations, one of which is that the client scope can't easily
We skipped session variables in favor of custom client variables and
traded session-scoped CFCs for something akin to a flyweight pattern
implementation. Our client variables setup is almost identical to
what CF provides, except that it allows complex values (because it's
serialized using WDDX, ra
3, 2004 2:42 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Session-Based CFC Usage Across Clusters
>
> I have read that session-based CFCs cannot be clustered (according to a
> livedoc comment).
>
> Because of this, how many people have decided to stick with using
> session-based CFCs rath
At 02:42 PM 7/23/2004, you wrote:
>I have read that session-based CFCs cannot be clustered (according to a
>livedoc comment).
It depends on how you do the clustering. Our clustering is done by IP
block, I believe just using the clustering ability built into Windows 2000
Advanced Server. One bloc
I have read that session-based CFCs cannot be clustered (according to a
livedoc comment).
Because of this, how many people have decided to stick with using
session-based CFCs rather than deal with the issues related to
clustering?
If you decided to focus on clustering and not use session-base
12 matches
Mail list logo
