Eric MacAdie wrote: > I do not mean to rain on anyone's parade, but I do have one concern. I > am running James on a VPS host with about 256 MB of memory, and right > now James uses about 50 MB or so. I noticed from > http://people.apache.org/builds/james/nightly/bin/ that the Spring > version is twice as big as the Phoenix/Avalon version. I do not have a > lot of memory to spare on my VPS account, and I would prefer not to > upgrade (I am looking for a job and money is tight). > > If James with Spring slows stuff down, I may have to look for something > else to handle email. Maybe I am making a big deal out of nothing, but a > cursory glance makes it appear that size may be an issue. Other than > that: +1
You are touching 3 different topics here: - runtime speed - RAM footprint - disk footprint Spring adds significantly to the disk footprint, but not neccessarily to the RAM footprint. In fact, only some core stuff of Spring is used. Recent releases of Spring provide more fine grained modules, so the disk footprint probably could be reduced quite a bit. I'd expect runtime speed to be exactly the same, because both containers only boot the components and step aside after bootstrapping. Bernd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
