On 8/29/06, Teddy Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Well, rebellion creates new ideas. As I said before, I would need to see
> more information on how to implement other database approaches. If 9GB is
> a
I was hoping Reactor would be a silver bullet...
Ranging from an embedded db to oracle
Well, rebellion creates new ideas. As I said before, I would need to see
more information on how to implement other database approaches. If 9GB is a
threshold, that covers a lot of applications that are very specific tool
sets that do not have to have 10,000 concurrent users using it. A lot of
i
Likewise, I'm just talking horses for courses. Our DB infrastructure
is used across:
1) Our entire web apps environment, which hosts hundreds of CF sites
2) Our Student (hundreds of thousands of people), Staff (thousands of
people) and Finance (billions of dollars of transactions) systems.
3) Vari
On 8/28/06, James Holmes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ...
> For some more perspective, our Oracle environment lives on a Sun E20K
> (http://www.sun.com/servers/highend/sunfire_e20k/index.xml) which,
> according to that link, start at US$452000 ish.
Dude, I got like 6 of those.
One for email, o
n Plesse
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Tue Aug 29 07:59:06 2006
Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
I would not replace Oracle or SQL Server and pink slip the DBA's just yet
and I would not use it to store 9 GB.
However I think developers should have to access to all available
I would not replace Oracle or SQL Server and pink slip the DBA's just yet
and I would not use it to store 9 GB.
However I think developers should have to access to all available solutions.
Right now I am doing things off the web with coldfusion that would not be
possible if I did not break the rul
Sorry to reply to myself, but that BLOB size limit is for Oracle 8 and
9 - in 10G Oracle can support a BLOB or CLOB of somewhere between 8
terabytes and 128 terabytes, depending on the DB block size. Yes,
terabytes.
On 8/29/06, James Holmes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/29/06, Denny Valliant <
On 8/29/06, Denny Valliant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't think it would be a very good data-warehouse... the largest object
> size seems to be around a megabyte... it does handle up to 8 gig databases
> now though... that's pretty big. Relatively speaking...
Well, Oracle's BLOBs can be u
On 8/28/06, Dan Plesse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's not my solution, that's why it's free and open. It would be nice if
> someone could run benchmarks on the different kinds
> of things you can create and use. Even the two different kinds protocols
> the
> server object uses could be tested.
I see a lot of comments on supporting the software vendors for Oracle and MS
SQL Server. These solutions attract organizations and developers because of
the level of documentation, training and certification offerings. Unless
you plan to create independent solutions that are for very specific
sol
It's not my solution, that's why it's free and open. It would be nice if
someone could run benchmarks on the different kinds
of things you can create and use. Even the two different kinds protocols the
server object uses could be tested.
I did run and test Derby and your welcome to that code as we
ng... which is kind of confusing. =]
Cheers,
!k
-Original Message-
From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 3:17 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
Kevin Aebig wrote:
>> Escrow licence on the sour
Kevin Aebig wrote:
>> Escrow licence on the source.
>
> If I wanted to support someone else's work, than I might as well just make
> my own.
Yet if the work is Bill's or Larry's, you want to support it by paying a
license?
> It's pretty obvious that MSSQL, Oracle and DB2 aren't open-source. At
's going to be around for
more than a few years...
!k
-Original Message-
From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 1:03 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
Kevin Aebig wrote:
> Not to mention that t
ge
(LDAP, XML, whatever).
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 9:38 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
>
> > While on that subject, a lot of people insist that e
> It should. Why don't you try it and find out for yourself?
I can only speak for myself, but I don't use Oracle and MS SQL Server
because they're faster. I use them because they're reliable, can be secured
and managed from outside of my application, can support multiple separate
applications, and
> I find it hard to believe that all this stuff is free and
> open and no one has tested this before.
For the same effect, you could just use PointBase, which ships with JRun/CF.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-aut
Things to consider with stored procs:
Plus: More logic is in the DB than in CF
Con: More logic is in the DB than in CF
If you want to switch Data providers, you have a major task- CF and the
DB are "hard-linked" sorta, if that makes sense.
And I think that there is a beliefe that stored pro
Kevin Aebig wrote:
> Not to mention that there's strength in numbers. Why would someone want to
> switch when they can find numerous online resources to issues / problems
> they're having with more widely adopted DBs?
>
> How can they be sure that you'll continue to support / upgrade this
> solut
YES if you use the webserver object
Its embedded but it has remote connectivity.
If you start the webserver inside a jws container you might also get object
persistence benefits.
I had trouble adding the driver at runtime, so I take this to mean that the
context might be off the CF map. Maybe
it
w that I'd feel uncomfortable having my stuff sitting in a
proprietary solution...
!k
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 11:16 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
> I would love to
ginal Message-
> From: Dan Plesse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 2:35 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
>
> It should. Why don't you try it and find out for yourself?
>
> On 8/28/06, R
o: CF-Talk
Sent: Mon Aug 28 19:35:06 2006
Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
It should. Why don't you try it and find out for yourself?
On 8/28/06, Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Dan, I think in all honesty the only person
mmunication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions."
> Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Dan Plesse
> To: CF-Talk
> Sent: Mon Aug 28 10:18:10 2006
> Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Prog
> I would love to test out "my" pure java embedded db in CF
> solution against any SP from Oracle or any of the other DBs.
>
> Just give me a dataset and I will knock one right out of the park.
>
> Write to me offline and I will set you up (for free) and you
> can test it out yourself.
>
> No
Dan Plesse wrote:
> I would love to test out "my" pure java embedded db in CF solution against
> any SP from Oracle or any of the other DBs.
I have a hard time believing that it can scale and perform:
http://db.lcs.mit.edu/madden/html/javapaper.pdf
Perhaps you can elaborate on the design of your
I must have misread somewhere. I apologize for misinterpreting the thread.
Cheers,
Teddy
~|
Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting,
up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivere
website at http://www.reedexpo.com
-Original Message-
From: Teddy Payne
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Mon Aug 28 15:22:17 2006
Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
Neil,
I am not sure you see the overall point. Both the in-line compiled queries
and stored procedures have go
Neil,
I am not sure you see the overall point. Both the in-line compiled queries
and stored procedures have good results. Most of the issues that I read
were about maintenance of code.
I am not sure telling people that they are incorrect is the best way to
share technological debates, but rather
edexpo.com
-Original Message-
From: Zaphod Beeblebrox
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Mon Aug 28 14:57:21 2006
Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
Then my sql server trace logs must be lying.
On 8/28/06, Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, you do no
Then my sql server trace logs must be lying.
On 8/28/06, Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, you do not, not really. This is not how SQL Server "works".
>
> You are still using inline compiled on demand SQL.
>
>
>
--
I took a walk around the world to ease my troubled mind
Well, there has been a strong aversion to my original thread and some
agreement with various aspects.
Let me add that I thank everyone for their comments. My usage of stored
procedures is my personal style of coding. I consider stored procedures a
good way to abstract my data code and enforce co
nions expressed within this
communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions."
Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com
-Original Message-
From: Dan Plesse
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Mon Aug 28 10:18:10 2006
Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
If I have a cluster of CF boxes, can they share the same embedded DB?
On 8/28/06, Dan Plesse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would love to test out "my" pure java embedded db in CF solution against
> any SP from Oracle or any of the other DBs.
>
> Just give me a dataset and I will knock one right o
I would love to test out "my" pure java embedded db in CF solution against
any SP from Oracle or any of the other DBs.
Just give me a dataset and I will knock one right out of the park.
Write to me offline and I will set you up (for free) and you can test it out
yourself.
No more DBA's and pia S
e not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions."
Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Mon Aug 28 02:38:21 2006
Subject: RE: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
> While on that subject, a lot of
our website at http://www.reedexpo.com
-Original Message-
From: Zaphod Beeblebrox
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Mon Aug 28 01:49:32 2006
Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
I run almost all my queries with queryparam so they're all precompiled
anyway. When I do a trace
Reed Exhibitions."
Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com
-Original Message-
From: Teddy Payne
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Mon Aug 28 01:42:25 2006
Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
I am not sure that I am seeing a valid argument to have ad hoc queries in
CF.
There are other concerns for using stored proc's other than just
performance and security.
We decided to enforce a "stored procedure only" policy because we were
experiencing issues with our cf servers related to database operations.
In addition we noticed a very number of database calls per pag
Interesting topic, eh?
As long as the SP doesn't get recompiled, the SP should be somewhat
faster than plain CF query.
SP coded in T-SQL or the powerful PL/SQL can save you lots of time
doing the same thing in CF too.
But when it goes to deployment, it will take more steps for just to
upgrade y
> While on that subject, a lot of people insist that everythig
> should be done with SP's wherever possible.
> While this is indeed a good idea for long/complex queries
> that will see vastly improved performance and speed, but I
> think it is wrong to do it just for the sake of it, and to
> pu
When we move from development to production, we have to provide SQL scripts
to setup all tables, SPs, views, and so on. Our "DBAs" are just there to
make sure the boxes stay up and running, they do not even run those SQL
scripts we provide. The scripts are ran usually by the web server admins.
O
I run almost all my queries with queryparam so they're all precompiled
anyway. When I do a trace, I see that sqlserver is calling that query
as an sp after the first call. Therefore, I get the benefits of speed
of the sp with the ease of deployment with cf.
On 8/27/06, Teddy Payne <[EMAIL PROTE
I am not sure that I am seeing a valid argument to have ad hoc queries in
CF.
Even for small queries, the execution time will typically always be faster
executed from a databse like MS SQl, Oracle ..etc than from the CF server.
As for contractors waiting for the copy of the stored procedure, the
I used'em in an app just to gain the ability to DO it. Sucked bigtime! Whenever
I needed to change some SQL for updates and such, it was a major PITA!
Sorry, but I think all that logic belongs in the app itself.
Will - Award Winning Author and Database Expert
~
Always depend on who the contract is being done for though. Most of the
places I have worked for always give us(the contractors) basically full
access to the DB in development and no access to production except special
cases where they give simple select access. I have done work for some
governme
edexpo.com
-Original Message-
From: Zaphod Beeblebrox
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Sun Aug 27 23:29:16 2006
Subject: Re: Stored procs (was Top 100 ColdFusion Programmers)
I did a project where sp's were used almost exclusively. That was a
major pia whenever it came to moving the app from dev to prod
I did a project where sp's were used almost exclusively. That was a
major pia whenever it came to moving the app from dev to production.
Usually, you can role an update to production by just copying over the
cfml. Changes in sp's required you to either increment the sp name,
or take the app down
While on that subject, a lot of people insist that everythig should be done
with SP's wherever possible.
While this is indeed a good idea for long/complex queries that will see
vastly improved performance and speed, but I think it is wrong to do it just
for the sake of it, and to put basic select o
49 matches
Mail list logo
