On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:32:33 +0200 Paul Dekkers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm, then your fscks will run faster/with less problems, but there is > still outage that you can prevent if there is failover in another way > and availability/replication on the application level. > If there are replicated spools it doesn't matter if the fsck takes long > or not... although there will be a backlog of course. Yes, but right now there are no replicated spools on the app level so i'm doing the best i can as a sysadmin :) > Is it possible to have an fsck running on one partition and have cyrus > started already (so part of the mail-store, e.g. archives, is not > available yet?) Not that i know ... i guess cyrus would be spewing lots of i/o errors back at you for the mailboxes that are on that fscking partition ;) > >The only high availability i see here is the google way. Cyrus is > >offering you that with the 'murder' component. > > > That's not really availability, but distributed risk. Exactly ... with murder taking care of keeping duplicated mailboxes in sync over a pool of backend machines (as i mentioned in the other mail), this would be perfect for all of us, i guess. > >BTW, you're mentioning FreeBSD ... doesn't it have some sort of > >background fsck while the filesystem is moutned rw? > > > It can, but I'm not sure if that's what I prefer. I'm not sure how > mature it is with FreeBSD, and I prefer to have mail-integrety over a > "quick restore". I can't speak about maturity of a certain FreeBSD component as i'm a linux guy, but what i hear it should just work. -- Jure PeÄar --- Cyrus Home Page: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyruswiki.andrew.cmu.edu List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
