t; Blog
> http://www.tacofleur.com/index/blog/
> Methodology http://www.tacofleur.com/index/methodology/
>
> Tell me and I will forget
> Show me and I will remember
> Teach me and I will learn
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Haroche [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes, but if I'm going to delete and re-initialize the Application
scope variables (at least other than very rarely) then I really should
use read only locks around the queries and expressions that include
those application variables, right?
I say no, I never lock any reads for Constants like th
First off, thanks again for all the follow up. The level and quality
of feedback, and tolerance for beginners, on this list is great.
Taco Fleur wrote:
> Now if you need to reinitialize these settings you simple do
>
>
> and they are all gone.
Yes, but if I'm going to delete and re-initialize t
remember
Teach me and I will learn
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 8 March 2004 10:53 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Newbie Locking Question
Set once for the application.
Peter Tilbrook
Transitional Services - Enterprise eSolutions
hread-safe, not the variable in the
struct.
Or, at least that's what I've been told.
Jim Davis
_
From: Bob Haroche [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 7:24 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Newbie Locking Question
Using CF 5...
If I set an Applica
2004 10:24 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Newbie Locking Question
Using CF 5...
If I set an Application variable once in Application.cfm that is
(theoretically) never going to change, eg:
Do I really need to place "read only" locks around every query in the
application that wants to access tha
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
net.au> cc:
Subject: RE: N
://www.tacofleur.com/index/methodology/
Tell me and I will forget
Show me and I will remember
Teach me and I will learn
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 8 March 2004 10:40 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Newbie Locking Question
Use the "request&q
tions.com> cc:
Subject: Newbie Locking Question
08/03/2004 11:24
No.
-Original Message-
From: Bob Haroche [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 6:24 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Newbie Locking Question
Using CF 5...
If I set an Application variable once in Application.cfm that is
(theoretically) never going to change, eg
Using CF 5...
If I set an Application variable once in Application.cfm that is
(theoretically) never going to change, eg:
Do I really need to place "read only" locks around every query in the
application that wants to access that database? I could see the need
to do that if the Application.DNS
No locking is needed for the REQUEST scope.
-Original Message-
From: Tilbrook, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 6:09 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Locking question?
Do I need to LOCK variables (when setting or reading)variables in the
REQUEST scope
Nope. Just Session, Server and Application scopes.
> -Original Message-
> From: Tilbrook, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 6:09 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Locking question?
>
>
> Do I need to LOCK variables (when setting or
Do I need to LOCK variables (when setting or reading)variables in the
REQUEST scope - particularly in the application.cfm?
My thoughts are no I don't but I wanted to check.
Cheers!
==
Peter Tilbrook
Internet Applications Developer
Australian Building Codes Board
GPO Box 9839
CANBERRA ACT 2601
AU
On Monday, Jan 13, 2003, at 22:27 US/Pacific, Matt Robertson wrote:
> Client vars are, for my money, the Holy Grail with respect to
> completely
> replacing session vars. Scaleable to clusters, zero locking issues,
> maintain state, and expiration can be controlled precisely like session
> vars w
Dave Watts wrote
>In general, I'm not a big fan of this approach,
Me neither, especially since not locking the session var in the
isdefined() as was shown in the original post is improper. You would
have to lock the whole thing, cfif isdefined and all.
Client vars are, for my money, the Holy Gra
> I got a tip previously on cf-talk that advised me to do
> this in my application.cfm:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Is this good or bad? (My sites typically have between 10
> and 200 connections.)
In general, I'm not a big fan of this approach, which
I heard someone mention temp variables, and I had some questions about best
practices in using them. Anyone mind giving some peer review?
I am serious about locking all application and session scope variables. In
my application.cfm, I put a read-only lock around the application scope and
duplicate
If you are going to put initialization code like this in your
Application.cfm file, just be sure that you do not use any code that
can generate another HTTP request for another CFM file (such as a
cfhttp tag) as you may either create an infinite loop (with a readonly
lock) or a deadlock (wi
You're right. It does create a nested lock situation. Realized this while I was coding
it after I posted.
So I changed it to this:
Open readonly lock
cfif NOT IsDefined(SomeApplicationVariable)
set AppIsInitialized = "N"
else
set AppIsInitialized ="Y"
close cfif
Close readonly lock
variables we need
in the Request scope.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Alberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 2:02 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Another Locking Question
>
>
> Ok, I thought I had the locking thing squared away, but af
Ok, I thought I had the locking thing squared away, but after reading this thread, I
realize that I do not. I was not aware of the potential problems of using an exclusive
lock in the Application.cfm file.
So ... is this (psuedo) code a reasonable solution?
Open readonly lock
If NOT IsDefined
Yes. Yes.
-- Original Message --
From: "Webmaster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:23:55 -0500
>Hi,
> If I reference an APPLICATION var using isDefined, do I have to read lock
>it. Is the var really being read?
>
ct: Re: Another Locking Question
On Sunday, Jan 12, 2003, at 13:23 US/Pacific, Matt Robertson wrote:
> I have yet
> to see any instance where locking instituted any noticeable
performance
> penalty at any level.
If you lock within Application.cfm, you will single-thread your
applicati
On Sunday, Jan 12, 2003, at 14:20 US/Pacific, Jochem van Dieten wrote:
> Sean A Corfield wrote:
>> If you lock within Application.cfm, you will single-thread your
>> application and it will not scale. For low-traffic applications, that
>> may be fine.
> I think that is a bit of an oversimplificatio
I got a tip previously on cf-talk that advised me to do this in my
application.cfm:
Is this good or bad? (My sites typically have between 10 and 200
connections.)
>
>Sean A Corfield wrote:
> > On Sunday, Jan 12, 2003, at 13:23 US/Pacific, Ma
Sean A Corfield wrote:
> On Sunday, Jan 12, 2003, at 13:23 US/Pacific, Matt Robertson wrote:
>
>>I have yet
>>to see any instance where locking instituted any noticeable performance
>>penalty at any level.
>
>
> If you lock within Application.cfm, you will single-thread your
> application and i
On Sunday, Jan 12, 2003, at 13:23 US/Pacific, Matt Robertson wrote:
> I have yet
> to see any instance where locking instituted any noticeable performance
> penalty at any level.
If you lock within Application.cfm, you will single-thread your
application and it will not scale. For low-traffic app
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:24 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Another Locking Question
Hi,
If I reference an APPLICATION var using isDefined, do I have to read
lock
it. Is the var really being
- Original Message -
From: "Webmaster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> If I reference an APPLICATION var using isDefined, do I have to read
lock
> it. Is the var really being read?
---
Yep - if you're not on CFMX, even IsDefined("sharedScope.varName") needs a
lock around i
On Sunday, Jan 12, 2003, at 12:23 US/Pacific, Webmaster wrote:
> If I reference an APPLICATION var using isDefined, do I have to read
> lock
> it. Is the var really being read?
No, but...
If you are trying to avoid a race condition, you may need to lock. See
my blog entry:
http://www.corfie
Hi,
If I reference an APPLICATION var using isDefined, do I have to read lock
it. Is the var really being read?
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com
You can lock them all as a group.
Cheers,
Jeff Garza
Webmaster,
Spectrum Astro, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Alii Design
To: CF-Talk
Sent: 6/2/01 8:18 AM
Subject: locking question
Do you need to lock each session variable individually or can you lock
them
all as a
Do you need to lock each session variable individually or can you lock them
all as a group using a cfscript?
Rich
~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://
.net
Voice: (508) 240-0051
Fax: (508) 240-0057
-Original Message-
From: David Baskin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 5:10 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Locking Question
Hello, i'm setting a session variable in a template so i'm using cflock, but
i'm getting
Hello, i'm setting a session variable in a template so i'm using cflock, but
i'm getting an error on the scope attribute. i've checked the documentation
and it doesn't list scope as valid, but it shows up in Studio and well, it
just makes sense that you would use scope. Below is the code i was try
CTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 5:41 PM
Subject: RE: session variable locking question
> I was wondering, is there somewhere I can find a good discussion on why
> locking session variables is a good idea? I have heard that it is
something
> that should be done, but our project lea
I was wondering, is there somewhere I can find a good discussion on why
locking session variables is a good idea? I have heard that it is something
that should be done, but our project leader insists that we do not need to
do it. What are the pros and cons of locking session variables?
Chris Ma
> Should client variables such as the following be inside a ?
No. Only memory variables (session, application, server) need to be locked.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
voice: (202) 797-5496
fax: (202) 797-5444
~~
Str
;t the attached
code a bad idea? I was given the impression that it's not a good idea to
monkey around manually with CFs client variable database.
Bob
-Original Message-
From: W Luke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: March 23, 2001 3:03 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: session variable locki
Message-
> From: Tim Bahlke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 2:15 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: session variable locking question
>
>
> In the following code, do I need a lock around the entire cfif statement?
>
>
>
>
>
>
&
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 2:15 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: session variable locking question
In the following code, do I need a lock around the entire cfif statement?
Is it better to declare [lock][lock]
instead of the IsDefined fun
In the following code, do I need a lock around the entire cfif statement?
Is it better to declare [lock][lock]
instead of the IsDefined function?
Thanks,
Tim Bahlke
~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fu
lusive locks because after the isdefined(), which by itself only
requires a readonly lock, you're modifying the session variables.
|-Original Message-
|From: Jon Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2001 5:11 PM
|To: CF-Talk
|Subject: Locking question
|
Jon Hall wrote:
> I have seen all of the warnings to make sure to use around any of
> the in memory variable types in a CF application. I hear that every access
> of a session, or application variable should have around it, or I
> could enable automatic locking on the server which will exact
I have seen all of the warnings to make sure to use around any of
the in memory variable types in a CF application. I hear that every access
of a session, or application variable should have around it, or I
could enable automatic locking on the server which will exact a performance
hit though. I
> It works the same as session variables, though not quite as fast
> they work a
> lot better and I don't have to worry about the locking all over the place.
> They use the same session.urltoken as session variables.
They do work pretty much the same, but you would need to keep in mind that
you c
ECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2000 8:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Simple locking question
> Personally I use Client variables located in a database exclusively. That
> way my application can easily made to be cluster aware and the database
> takes care of the locking.
So
> Personally I use Client variables located in a database exclusively. That
> way my application can easily made to be cluster aware and the database
> takes care of the locking.
So at an abstract level, how does that work? Currently I just assign the
needed information to session variables and a
]]
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2000 2:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Simple locking question
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I read the Allaire article on locking and am now using locks when
working with session variables. Now I am wondering if I should be using
session
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I read the Allaire article on locking and am now using locks when
working with session variables. Now I am wondering if I should be using
session variables at all?
In my app, the user logs in and at that time I put a bunch of
information about them (
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I read the Allaire article on locking and am now using locks when
working with session variables. Now I am wondering if I should be using
session variables at all?
In my app, the user logs in and at that time I put a bunch of
information about them (
0 3:07 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: YAFLQ (Yet Another "Fine" Locking Question)
Sounds like some relaxing reading for the Labor Day weekend... I can hear
my wife now... "What are you reading?" .. Just trying to brush up on the
finer points of avoiding corrupted
ther "Fine" Locking Question)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You'll want to modify that code a bit...
You're better off avoiding any locks around things like CFQUERY that
can take a while to run.
Just skimming the code, it looks like you're READING
ses
OTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2000 10:54 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: YAFLQ (Yet Another "Fine" Locking Question)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You'll want to modify that code a bit...
You're better off avoiding any locks around thin
if the string
> is greater it returns a positive value (the strings were not equal
> yet just doing compare would then mean the statement would evaluate
> to the truth which is not what you would intend)
>
> Anyhow ill hush now :)
>
>
> Jeremy Allen
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Insert Quarter H
> If I have references to session variables that are nested,
> do I need to lock each reference separately or can I wrap
> the whole thing in one lock?
You can, and probably should, wrap them all within one lock.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
voice: (202) 797-5496
ow ill hush now :)
Jeremy Allen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Insert Quarter Here >[]<
-Original Message-
From: Ricq Pattay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2000 10:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: YAFLQ (Yet Another "Fine" Locking Question)
If I have re
Sorry, that first lock should be type="readonly".
>
Ricq Pattay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Univ of Minnesota - Twin Cities
College of Veterinary Medicine
--
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-
If I have references to session variables that are nested, do I need to lock
each reference separately or can I wrap the whole thing in one lock?
e.g.,
select message_text
from vcross.messages
where
[LOCK HERE?]
message_type = 'student'
[LOCK HERE?]
message_type = 'faculty'
60 matches
Mail list logo
