[thesite] CF error on home page

[jeff]

<ol>,

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: From: Oliver Lineham
:
: > my official opinion is that using automatic lock
: > checking is the wrong solution to the problem.
:
: it's not a solution to any problem, just a safeguard
: against bad coders.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

on the contrary.  there is an option in the admin to turn on read-only
locking.  this is supposed to eliminate the need to perform them yourself.
this is intended to be a solution to the problem from allaire.  don't
forget, lock checking is not the only locking related setting in the
administrator.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: for that matter, we have no evidence that it wasn't
: someone else's bad CF app that corrupted the server
: memory, since it is a shared server.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

this is true.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: > the problem with it in a shared environment is that it
: > could potentially throw errors in other applications
: > on the server that aren't locking or using named locks
: > instead of scoped locks.
:
: my personal opinion is that a shared environment is a
: particularly good place for lock checking, so that one
: person's badly written application can't screw up
: someone else's good one.  the problem is, you have to
: implement it right from the start. if you just switch it on
: oneday, some people might be very upset :)
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

i think it's exactly the opposite.  you don't want lock checking on in a
shared environment because these are the types of server environments where
there are already bottlenecks.  there's no sense adding additional overhead
by performing lock checking, partially or in full.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: > my personal feeling about automatic lock checking is
: >  that it breeds lazy programmers.
:
: > it always going to be more appropriate and more
: > efficient to perform the locks yourself.
:
: are you sure you understand lock checking?  it doesn't
: perform the locks.  you still have to perform the locks
: yourself. it'll just throw an error if you don't..
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

i'm quite sure i understand locks and the various options relating to them
in the cf administrator.  there is indeed an option to perform read-only
locks.  this eliminates the need to perform them yourself.  what this causes
however, is the necessity to lock all writes as those will now cause errors
if they're not locked.

on top of that some small apps don't warrant the development overhead of
making sure to lock all reads and writes.  to have the server set to do a
full check is a ridiculous penalty to put on the development of this small
app where that simply isn't necessary.

or worse, take thesite in it's current incarnation as an example.  if you
turn on partial or full lock checking you'll effectively take the site down
for at least a week while several experienced cf programmers comb through
the source repairing all the write and/or read locks that are missing.  i
don't know about you, but i don't have the time for that.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: >Allaire Documentation (case in point):
:
: i don't see your point.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

weren't you the one complaining about allaire documentation only a couple of
months back?

http://lists.evolt.org/archive/Week-of-Mon-20000925/004169.html
http://lists.evolt.org/archive/Week-of-Mon-20000925/004201.html

regards,

.jeff

name://jeff.howden
game://web.development
http://www.evolt.org/
mailto:jeff at members.evolt.org