Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-beehive-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 39477 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2006 10:28:34 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Mar 2006 10:28:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 65881 invoked by uid 500); 30 Mar 2006 10:28:32 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-beehive-user-archive@beehive.apache.org Received: (qmail 65736 invoked by uid 500); 30 Mar 2006 10:28:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@beehive.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Beehive Users" Delivered-To: mailing list user@beehive.apache.org Received: (qmail 65696 invoked by uid 99); 30 Mar 2006 10:28:31 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 02:28:31 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: unknown (asf.osuosl.org: error in processing during lookup of jaustin@bea.com) Received: from [194.203.24.6] (HELO ukhwmh01.bea.com) (194.203.24.6) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 02:28:30 -0800 Received: from FRPAFE01.emea.bea.com (frpafe01.bea.com [10.16.0.25]) by ukhwmh01.bea.com (Switch-3.0.5/Switch-3.0.0) with ESMTP id k2UAS7n8002032 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 11:28:07 +0100 Received: from UKHWEX01.emea.bea.com ([10.0.0.15]) by FRPAFE01.emea.bea.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:28:07 +0200 Received: from [10.0.14.39] ([10.0.14.39]) by UKHWEX01.emea.bea.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6747); Thu, 30 Mar 2006 11:28:16 +0100 Subject: Pageflow footprint compared to Struts.. From: James Allerton-Austin Reply-To: james.allerton-austin@bea.com To: Beehive Users In-Reply-To: References: <715057EB65FC7E47923FE408F290ADFD06B84E@ettoma01.embarcadero.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-ePzLiLQjiOnSnmwx3eIV" Organization: BEA Systems Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 11:27:25 +0100 Message-Id: <1143714445.6802.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-7) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Mar 2006 10:28:16.0746 (UTC) FILETIME=[A84634A0:01C653E4] X-PMX-Version: 4.7.0.111621, Antispam-Engine: 2.0.2.0, Antispam-Data: 2006.03.11.125104 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N --=-ePzLiLQjiOnSnmwx3eIV Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi there, IHAC who wants to make the "best" decision for his MVC infrastructure. Currently, they are looking at Struts, Pageflow and Spring MVC. They are very focused on the memory footprint that pageflow has over struts. Does anyone have any experience of the relative footprint of pageflow vs struts and Spring MVC? cheers JAA James Allerton-Austin Senior SE Mobile: +44 (0) 77 80 69 30 60 Yahoo: jaustinbea jaustin@bea.com BEA Systems, Ltd. Windsor Court Kingsmead Business Park Frederick Place, London Road High Wycombe Bucks, HP11 1JU England www.bea.com _______________________________________________________________________ Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it. --=-ePzLiLQjiOnSnmwx3eIV--