I migrated from CF10 standard to CF11 trial version but the chart fail to render in the webpage. It says com.gp.api.jsp.MxServerComponent is not found

Does anyone here know whether CF11 comes with Webchart3D?

Hello, everyone.

I did fix the last Sandbox security related issue with Solr collections - it was in the "Files/Dir" section, I had to put everything under C:\ColdFusion9\wwwroot.

Now, I'm facing yet another Sandbox related issue with collections.

I have one reindex script that has NO ISSUES when pulling data from a database and indexing a collection from that.

I have another reindex script that will not index a collection from a query, unless Sandbox is disabled.  I will try to give some pseudo code.

<cfquery name="search_results" datasource="documents">  SELECT DOC_ID, DOC_NAME, DOC_DESCRIPTION  FROM DOC  WHERE DOC_ID in (<cfqueryparam value="#thisList#" cfsqltype="CF_SQL_VARCHAR" list="yes">)</cfquery><cftry>  <cfindex action="refresh" collection="collection_name" key="DOC_DESCRIPTION" type="custom" title="DOC_DESCRIPTION" query="search_results" body="DOC_ID, DOC_NAME, DOC_DESCRIPTION" status="results" />  <cfcatch><cfdump var="#cfcatch#"></cfcatch></cftry>

The query will retrieve 15 records, with or without Sandbox.  But the CFINDEX will not work if Sandbox is enabled.

The other reindex script is not affected, either way.

What could be causing the CFINDEX to fail?

Thank you,

^_^

G'day:

I am reposting this from my blog ("ColdFusion 11: custom serialisers. More questions than answers") at the suggestion of Adobe support:

@dacCfml@ColdFusion Can you post your queries at http://t.co/8UF4uCajTC for all cfclient and mobile queries.

— Anit Kumar Panda (@anitkumar85) April 29, 2014

This particular question is not regarding <cfclient>, hence posting it on the regular forum, not on the mobile-specific one as Anit suggested. I have edited this in places to remove language that will be deemed inappropriate by the censors here. Changes I have made are in [square brackets]. The forums software here has broken some of the styling, but so be it.

G'day:
I've been wanting to write an article about the new custom serialiser one can have in ColdFusion 11, but having looked at it I have more questions than I have answers, so I have put it off. But, equally, I have no place to ask the questions, so I'm stymied. So I figured I'd write an article covering my initial questions. Maybe someone can answer then.

ColdFusion 11 has added the notion of a custom serialiser a website can have (docs: "Support for pluggable serializer and deserializer"). The idea is that whilst Adobe can dictate the serialisation rules for its own data types, it cannot sensibly infer how a CFC instance might get serialised: as each CFC represents a different data "schema", there is no "one size fits all" approach to handling it. So this is where the custom serialiser comes in. Kind of. If it wasn't a bit rubbish. Here's my exploration thusfar.

One can specify a custom serialiser by adding a setting to Application.cfc:

component {     this.name = "serialiser01";     this.customSerializer="Serialiser"; } 

In this case the value - Serialiser - is the name of a CFC, eg:

// Serialiser.cfccomponent {     public function canSerialize(){         logArgs(args=arguments, from=getFunctionCalledName());         return true;     }     public function canDeserialize(){         logArgs(args=arguments, from=getFunctionCalledName());         return true;     }     public function serialize(){         logArgs(args=arguments, from=getFunctionCalledName());         return "SERIALISED";     }     public function deserialize(){         logArgs(args=arguments, from=getFunctionCalledName());         return "DESERIALISED";     }     private function logArgs(required struct args, required string from){         var dumpFile = getDirectoryFromPath(getCurrentTemplatePath()) & "dump_#from#.html";         if (fileExists(dumpFile)){             fileDelete(dumpFile);         }         writeDump(var=args, label=from, output=dumpFile, format="html");     } } 

This CFC needs to implement four methods:

• canSerialize() - indicates whether something can be serialised by the serialiser;
• canDeserialize() - indicates whether something can be deserialised by the serialiser;
• serialize() - the function used to serialise something
• deserialize() - the function used to deserialise something

I'm being purposely vague on those functions for a reason. I'll get to that.

The first [issue] in the implementation here is that for the custom serialisation to work, all four of those methods must be implemented in the serisalisation CFC. So common sense would dictate that a way to enforce that would be to require the CFC to implement an interface. That's what interfaces are for. Now I know people will argue the merit of having interfaces in CFML, but I don't really give a [monkey's] about that: CFML has interfaces, and this is what they're for. So when one specifies the serialiser in Application.cfc and it doesn't fulfil the interface requirement, it should error. Right then. When one specifies the inappropriate tool for the job. What instead happens is if the functions are omitted, one will get erratic behaviour in the application, through to outright errors when ColdFusion goes to call the functions and cannot find it. EG: if I have canSerialize() but no serialize() method, CF will error when it comes to serialise something:

2 : o = new Basic();
3 :4 : serialised = serializeJson(o);5 : writeDump([serialised]);
6 : 

Note that the error comes when I go to serialise something, not when ColdFusion is told about the serialiser in the first place. This is just lazy/thoughtless implementation on the part of Adobe. It invites bugs, and is just sloppy.

The second [issue] follows immediately on from this.

Given my sample serialiser above, I then run this test code to examine some stuff:

o = new Basic(); serialised = serializeJson(o); writeDump([serialised]); deserialised = deserializeJson(serialised); writeDump([deserialised]); 

So all I'm doing is using (de)serializeJson() as a baseline to see how the functions work. here's Basic.cfc, btw:

component { } 

And the test output:

This is as one would expect. OK, so that "works". But now... you'll've noted I am logging the arguments each of the serialisation methods receives, as I got.

Here's the arguments passed to canSerialize():

My reaction to that is: "[WTH]?" Why is canSerialize() being passed the string "XML" when I'm trying to serialise an object of type Basic.cfc?

Here's the docs for canSerialize() (from the page I linked to earlier):

CanSerialize - Returns a boolean value and takes the "Accept Type" of the request as the argument. You can return true if you want the customserialzer to serialize the data to the passed argument type.

Again, back to "[WTH]?" What's the "Accept type" of the request? And what the hell has the request got to do with a call to serializeJson()? You might think that "Accept type" references some HTTP header or something, but there is no "Accept type" header in the HTTP spec (that I can find: "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1: 14 Header Field Definitions"). There's an "Accept" header (in this case: "text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,image/webp,*/*;q=0.8"), and other ones like "Accept-Encoding", "Accept-Language"... but none of which contain a value of "XML". Even if there was... how would it be relevant to the question as to whether a Basic.cfc instance can be serialised? Raised as bug: 3750730.

serialize() gets more sensible arguments:

So the first is the object to serialise (which surely should be part of the question canSerialize() is supposed to ask, and the format to serialise to. Cool.

canDeserialize() is passed this:

I guess it's because it's being called from deserializeJson(), so it's legit to expect the input value is indeed JSON. Fair enough. (Note: I'm not actually passing it JSON, but that's beside the point here).

And deserialize() is passed this:

The first argument is the value to work on, and the second is the type of deserialisation to do. I have no idea what the third argument is for, and it's not mentioned directly or indirectly on that docs page. So dunno what the story is there.

The next issue isn't a code-oriented one, but an implementation one: how the hell are we expected to work with this?

The only way to work here is for each function to have a long array of IF/ELSEIF statements which somehow identify each object type that is serialisable, and then return true from canSerialise(), or in the case of serialize(), go ahead and do the serialisation. So this means this one CFC needs to know about everything which can be serialised in the entire application. Talk about a failure in "separation of concerns".

You know the best way of determining if an object can be seriaslised? Ask it! Don't rely on something else needing to know. This can be achieved very easily in one of two ways:

• Check to see if the object implements a "Serializable" interface, which requires a serialize() method to exist.
• Or simply take the duck-typing approach: if a CFC implements a serialize() method: it can be serialised. By calling that method. Job done.

Either approach would work fine, keeps things nicely encapsulated, and I see merits in both. And either make far more sense than Adobe's approach. Which is like something from the "OO Failures Special Needs" class.

Deserialisation is trickier. Because it relies on somehow working out how to deserialise() an object. I'm not sure of the best approach here, but - again - how to deserialise something should be as close to the thing needing deserialisation as possible. IE: something in the serialised data itself which can be used to bootstrap the process.

This could simply be a matter of specifying a CFC type at a known place in the serialised data. EG: Adobe stipulates that if the serialised data is JSON, and at the top level of the JSON is a key eg: type, and the value is an extant CFC... use that CFC's deserialize() method. Or it could look for an object which contains a type and a method, or whatever. But Adobe can specify a contract there.

The only place I see a centralised CFC being relevant here is for a mechanism for handling serialised data that is neither a ColdFusion internal type, nor identifiable as above. In this case, perhaps they could provide a mechanism for a serialisation router, which basically has a bunch of routes (if/elseifs if need be) which contains logic as to how to work out how to deserialise the data. But it should not be the actual deserialiser, it should simply have the mechanism to find out how to do it. This is actually pretty much the same in operation as the deserialize() approach in the current implementation, but it doesn't need the canDeserialize() method (it can return false at the end of the routing), and it doesn't need to know about serialising. And also it's not the main mechanism to do the deserialisation, it's just the fall back if the prescribed approach hasn't been used.

TBH, this still sounds a bit jerry-built, and I'm open for better suggestions. This is probably a well-trod subject in other languages, so it might be worth looking at how the likes of Groovy, Ruby or even PHP (eek!) achieve this.

There's still another issue with the current approach. And this demonstrates that the Adobe guys don't actually work with either CFML applications or even modern websites. This approach only works for a single, stand-alone website (like how we might have done in 2001). What if I'm not in the business of building websites, but I build applications such as FW/1 or ColdBox or the like? Or any sort of "helper" application. They cannot use the current Adobe implementation of the customserializer. Why? Because the serialisation code needs to be in a website-specific CFC. There's no way for Luis to implement a custom serialiser in ColdBox (for example), and then have it work for someone using ColdBox. Because it relies on either editing Application.cfc to specify a different CFC, or editing the existing customSerializer CFC. Neither of which are very good solutions. This should have been immediately apparent to the Adobe engineer(s) implementing this stuff had they actually had any experience with modern web applications (which generally aren't just a single monolithic site, but an aggregation of various other sub applications). Equally, I know it's not a case of having thought about this and [I'm just missing something], because when I asked them the other day, at first they didn't even get what I was asking, but when I clarified were just like "oh yeah... um... err... yeah, you can't do that. We'll... have to... ah yeah". This has been raised as bug 3750731.

So I declare the intent here valid, but the implementation to be more alpha- / pre-release- quality, not release-ready.

Still: it could be easily deprecated and rework fairly easily. I've raised this as bug 3750732.

Or am I missing something?

--
Adam

I purchased a new laptop with Windows 8.1. I had a previous latop that had been upgraded to Windows 8.1 and ran CF10 perfectly fine. I made sure the necessary IIS modules were installed for CF. I installed CF11 using the "Run as administrator" option, just to be on safe side. Everything appeared to go smoothly and no hiccups occured. However, when I click to go CF admin page, I received an Error 500. I've made sure permissions on the folders are correct and allow for the IIS_USR a even IUSR. Any help would be greatly appreciated. I am sort of at a loss here.

The detailed information is as follows:

Detailed Error Information:

CF11 install linux failure

Expected: bundled JRE should work on Ubuntu 13.1

Launching installer...

JRE libraries are missing or not compatible....

# java -version

java version "1.7.0_55"

OpenJDK Runtime Environment (IcedTea 2.4.7) (7u55-2.4.7-1ubuntu1~0.13.10.1)

OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 24.51-b03, mixed mode)

I am running Coldfusion 9 and building a website using Dreamweaver from CS5.

Is there a way to make a form field appear only if a certain value was entered into the previous form field? If so how? For example I am creating a registration page and one of the form fields is "Property Type" where the user can choose from "Residential, Commercial, Other" from a drop down menu and if the user chooses "Commercial" I want an additional field to pop up for the user to enter a value in "Company Name"??? Thanks for your help

I had a battle with this, I've googled and seen more than 100 results and have not found the solution.

I installed many times "Coldfusion", in different ways, in different distributions of linux and can not find the solution to the much hated "flex2gateway", tryig so many fixes but none worked for me, I keep getting the 404.

System details: Debian Wheezy (7.0), Coldfusion 10, Apache 2.2.22

I hope someone can help me.

Has anyone had this issue? How would I go about fixing it?

Hi,

I'm currently installing CF 10 to a couple of Linux RedHat 6 x86_64 environments.  All is well until I attempt to update the installation.

If I try to run any of the updates, I receive the following error:

                               Error occurred while downloading the update: Failed Signature verification

A little research taught me that adobe changed their code signing certificate; thus there is a mandatory update that must be run before any other can:   http://helpx.adobe.com/coldfusion/kb/coldfusion-10-mandatory-update.html  (I double checked our build number, we need this update).

The update won't run.

I followed the instructions found here: http://help.adobe.com/en_US/ColdFusion/10.0/Admin/WSe61e35da8d318518-33adffe0134c60cd31c-7 ffe.html  (we're running a standalone installation).

I'm trying to work with the linux console mode instructions. I run:

:/shell>sudo java -jar cf10_mdt_updt.jar

(.:7367): Gtk-WARNING **: cannot open display:

I also tried writing a conf file and running in silent mode:

:/shell>sudo java -jar cf10_mdt_updt.jar -i silent -f ./properties_file

(.:7440): Gtk-WARNING **: cannot open display:

The properties file looks like:

INSTALLER_UI=SILENT

USER_INSTALL_DIR=[root dir]

DOC_ROOT=[path to doc root]

#The following applies only to multi server scenarios.

#INSTANCE_LIST=cfusion,cfusion1

It looks to me like the "console" version of this installer is attempting to leverage x11... which our servers are never going to install and run.  has anyone else run into this?  Is the installer really that badly conceived or am I doing something wrong?  is there a way to install this mandatory update in a commandline environment?

Thank you

Dave

we have a website on cfmx7 and are looking to move it to a dedicated server and therefore need to purchase the latest cf software, but we do not want to amend the code.  Is it possible to buy a cf11 licence but downgrade it to cfmx7?

I know this was an issue that was supposedly fixed in the first update, but I applied that and I'm still experiencing the error.  Any ideas?

Version says ColdFusion 10,283649

A little background:

We upgraded from CF8 Enterprise to CF10 Enterprise about a week ago. In order to transfer all of our scheduled tasks to the new server I copied neo-cron.xml over to the new folder. I quickly discovered that this was a bad idea on encountering all kinds of weird issues such as being unable to edit tasks or delete them; I'd get messages like

An error occured scheduling the task.

Unable to store Job :

'SERVERSCHEDULETASK#$%^DEFAULT.job_TEST TASK', because one already

exists with this identification.

...when trying to edit an existing task. I'm actually still getting that one sometimes. I'd get similar errors when trying to delete some tasks.

Well, I took to google and discovered that copying neo-cron.xml from CF8 to CF10 is a bad idea. So, after making a .txt reference file of all of the tasks, I shut down CF10, deleted neo-cron.xml and neo-cron.bak, replaced neo-cron.xml with the blank one from our CF10 dev server, and restarted the service. Then I manually recreated all of the tasks.

Then, on doublechecking my work, I realized I'd put in the wrong start time for one of the tasks. I tried to edit it. Got the above error. Swore a little bit. Since I couldn't edit it, I deleted it, and recreated it with a slightly different name (since it wouldn't let me recreate it with the same name, because of the same "already exists with this identification" thing). Made sure to enter the correct start time this time. Refreshed the page a few times, checked neo-cron, only my new task was listed there, everything looks good.

Then I came in this morning and took a look at the CF Administrator and my old task is back, and showing that it ran at the original (wrong) time, despite my having deleted the thing!

So what is going on?

1) Why am I STILL getting this error when I try to edit existing tasks, and

2) Why won't deleted tasks stay deleted? (Or paused tasks stay paused for that matter; they still run too.)

I have run all of the server upgrades through the Administrator GUI (I believe 13 was the most recent). Here is my System Information dump:

Trying it install coldfusion builder 3 as an upgrade on a new computer but when I put in the previosu serial number for cfb1 its saying its not valid. However it is a valid key.

I have the development version of CF10 installed on a Windows 7 system with Apache 2 and would like to start testing some code with CF11.  Can I install CF11 without replacing CF10?  I don't need them to both be activated at the same time, but would like to be able to switch back if necessary.   I develop code for a non-profit that is running CF 9 but is thinking of jumping to CF11.  

Hi,

Has anybody implemented/worked with FedEx web services in CF? I'm looking for sample CF code consuming FedEx web services (v 7), such as get rates info, get rate services, etc.

Many thanks in advance.

Hi I'm suffering with this issue Bug#3506758 - MySQL 5.6 Unable to Execute Queries

and therefore am trying to update cf 10 to version 13 (current version is 8) however I get 'Error occurred while installing the update: Failed Signature verification'

I'm running Mavericks on Mac.

Can anyone point me to a step by step way to resovle this please (I'm new to Macs and am a cf coder but alas dont have any experience in server admin).

Thanks very much indeed.

Nick

Hi,

CF 10 docs seem a tad thin on the subject of silent / unattended / scripted installation and configuration.

I need to find a fully automated (scripted) way to do these things:

1) install of ColdFusion 10 server in standalone mode

2) create additional servers instances

3) configure each server instance separately (settings, data sources, mappings, etc)

Is this currently possible with CF 10? If yes, where's the documentation?

I'm aiming for a Chef cookbook for performing unattended CF10 installations on a farm of headless Linux hosts. Manual configuration through the Administrator UI is a definite deal breaker here.

Thanks in advance!

Best regards,

Jan

Hi, we've just moved a large application from CF8 to CF10 and are seeing that CFHTTP performance is *much* slower on the new system.

We've verified this by sequentially running 50 CFHTTP calls to small static assets on an Apache server, measuring the response times with gettickcount(), and averaging over several runs.

On our old (Ubuntu + JRun + CF 8) installation, we're averaging about 1 ms per request.

On our new (Centos + CF 10 standalone) installation, we're averaging 5000 ms per request. That's 5000 times slower.

We initially suspected that this was related to entropy generation issues as the first request in a test run would return relatively faster (a few hundred ms in total) compared to all subsequent requests in that run.  However, attempting to modify the JVM settings as prescribed did not resolve the issue.  We've further tried using alternative entropy-generating tools (as recommended in the original blog post cited in the aforementioned thread), but that has not helped either.

Note that we've also tested http performance outside of CF by using wget from a shell script, where we saw good performance (approx 1ms per request).

All help on this issue will be greatly appreciated, thanks!

Update: just tested the CF+Java-based CFHTTP alternative http://coldfusion9.blogspot.com/2012/03/custom-cfhttp-tag.html

It required a few minor bug fixes, but is greatly outperforming CF 10's CFHTTP, averaging 33 ms per request (still much slower than CF 8, but usable for most purposes).  Nonetheless, I'm still looking for a fix to restore appropriate speed to CFHTTP!

Message was edited by: Jon Obuchowski to add testing with custom CFHTTP tag