> Do you really care about disk space? With terabyte hard drives only being a > few hundred bucks, what's a hundred MBs? I'm sure we could use JarJar to > create a single JAR that's 10 MB, but I think there's bigger fish to fry. I > agree it's rather large, but I have 1 GB of space for $20/month, so it > doesn't bother me. If it really bothers you, the best way to get it fixes is > to come up with a proposal for fixing and implement it. I'm sure we'd be > happy to accept your contribution.
I think I wasn't clear. The disk space isn't the issue, it's the 95M of memory extra in tomcat that roller is using. Like I said, it might be that I need to trim down the cache to reflect the size of this particular site. But from what I understand and have seen, the libraries you include in your web app increase the amount of memory tomcat uses. Most hosting companies don't care how much bandwidth or diskspace you use because in most cases users only dream of even using 1/4 of their allowed bandwidth. Memory and CPU is what causes them headaches. Now with virtualization technologies becoming more popular it gives them the opportunity to regulate it. This is why it's harder to find good affordable java hosting vs php hosting. I got gigs worth of memory to play with but it bugs me to see other people choosing something written in another technology over java when the java implementation is better. Just because some person decided to include a big jar file, only to use one class they could have written themselves in a dozen lines. With a blog, the more smaller individual users using it, the better for everyone.
