Coldfusion MX 6.1 compared to 5.0

[alexerm]

Could anyone tell me please, how Coldfusion MX 6.1 compared to Coldfusion 5 in terms of speed?

I've heard that CF MX works much slower than CF 5. Is this true? How about MX6.1 compared to MX6.0?

I'm not worried about new functions in MX. I just want somebody's opinion on execution speed.

Thanks,

 

[csteinhilber]

We've found that 6.1 is significantly faster than 5.0... especially when you run it on a J2EE app server rather than JRUN.

6.0 was faster than 5.0, too, but the increase was not as significant. 6.1 is quite a bit faster than even 6.0.

MX just processed CFML faster, period. And the JDBC database drivers seem faster than the ODBC counterparts as well (for databases like Oracle, which were already using native drivers, there's not a whole lot of difference... but for Access, etc, they're noticably faster). The autolocking functionality seems to let things faster than coding CFLOCKs, too... haven't quite figured that one out.

Some templates take a bit of extra time to compile on firstrun... but once they're compiled, they leave 5.0 templates in the dust. And we've found that a customer is rarely the first one to hit a template (since we always give things "one last test" on the production server)... so they're never the ones to feel the pain of compiling time.

BUT... if you're happy with the feature set of 5.0, and you're not unhappy with your current performance, I'd probably think twice about upgrading just to get the performance boost. 5.0 code isn't completely 100% compatible with MX (definitely not as compatible as Macromedia would lead you to believe... and the upgrade wizard that's supposed to help you migrate old code to make it compatible tends not to work all that well... misses quite a lot of stuff). Upgrading can mean spending a lot of cycles making everything work right again.


-Carl