[Freedombox-discuss] prosody vs ejabberd

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On 11-10-09 at 11:26am, Sameer Verma wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Bdale Garbee <bdale at gag.com> wrote:
> > I could use input from people who have *actually used* prosody 
> > and/or ejabberd about your experiences and the resulting pros and 
> > cons of the two daemons.
> >
> > At the moment, it appears that either could be a plausible choice 
> > for the foundation's reference implementation, but it's time to pick 
> > one.

> I use ejabberd on a variety of x86 hardware including FitPC 
> (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fit-PC), OLPC XO-1 
> (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/OLPC_XO-1) and FitPC2 
> (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fit-PC#fit-PC2) in the 
> context of running a school server server for OLPC projects. OLPC uses 
> ejabberd by default.
> 
> On the XO1, the entire OS including ejabberd and database etc. run 
> from a SD card. On the FitPCs we use a 64GB SSD.

Interesting.

Could you perhaps elaborate also on the memory consumption and typical 
number of concurrent active Jabber users.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20111009/a3f5e7e5/attachment.pgp>