lightweight Chat client/server?

[Depo Catcher]

Thanks.  I guess I should started with that first.  It's a nice program, 
so if I can reduce it's load a bit that would be great.

I tried setting Xmx to 16M and removed the '-server' from the 
/usr/local/etc/rc.d/openfire script
     openfire_javargs="-Xmx16M"

ps shows that it took the setting:
      /usr/local/diablo-jdk1.5.0/bin/java -jar -Xmx16M 
-Dopenfire.lib.dir=/usr/local/share/java/classes 
-DopenfireHome=/usr/local/shar

 From top:
     40724 openfire     13  20    0   214M 70336K kserel 0   0:24  0.89% 
java
Top still shows it 214M Size with ~70M Res

That's better, but still seems a bit much.  Not sure why it's still 
allocating that, I guess it might be native libs or something?

We all spammed a bunch of text to each other (a ton more than normal 
usage) and still it works fine.  Any way to get it down more?


On 8/3/2010 5:15 PM, Charles Richards wrote:
> You can tune the openfire JVM configuration to run in 256MB of RAM, possibly less with only<  6 users.
> You also do not need to use an external DB for it - it can run with it's own embedded DB.
>
> It's probably the easiest to install / configure Jabber client I've come across, but there's a good list noted here: http://xmpp.org/software/servers.shtml
>
>
>
>
> Charles Richards
> www.charlesrichards.net
> richardsc at gmail.com
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 3, 2010, at 2:18 PM, Bill Moran wrote:
>
>    
>> In response to Depo Catcher<depocatcher at gmail.com>:
>>      
>>> I have a combination of Spark (windows client) and Open Fire (FreeBSD
>>> server, actually Java) for my lan.
>>> We've used this setup for years, but the OpenFire server takes up ~500 +
>>> MB.
>>>
>>> Anyways, we were looking for something a bit smaller.
>>> We just need to send text messages to LAN users (less than 6) and
>>> supports a nice windows client.
>>> We're not suppose to use any external services (yahoo messenger, aol, etc)
>>>        
>> We've been using Jabber for several years internally.  Works well and
>> has clients for just about every OS I know of.
>>
>> Don't know if it could be considered lightweight, though, since it
>> requires an SQL server on the backend.  If you already have another
>> SQL server in production, you could just install the DB there, as its
>> DB usage is pretty light.
>>
>> -- 
>> Bill Moran
>> http://www.potentialtech.com
>> http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>>      
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>