Re: Reliable mailstore

2002-01-10 Thread birger
Noll Janos schrieb am Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 02:25:51PM +0100: * Hello! * * On 10-Jan-2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * > Upon inexpensivety: Maybe there is another idea possible. Kimberlite * > does sort of a parallel mount to a RAID on a shared SCSI bus. Maybe * > there is a way here to achieve l

Re: Reliable mailstore

2002-01-10 Thread Robert Scussel
> There are catches, though. If a mail arrives at the live box, then the user > deletes the "last" mail in the folder, and only then (in time) does the same > mail arrive in the backup box, you have two desynched boxes. This shouldn't > really happen, since the two boxes should run at the same sp

Re: Reliable mailstore

2002-01-10 Thread Noll Janos
Hello! On 10-Jan-2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Upon inexpensivety: Maybe there is another idea possible. Kimberlite > does sort of a parallel mount to a RAID on a shared SCSI bus. Maybe > there is a way here to achieve low-level distance. If you have a bus > that could be transported over so

Re: Reliable mailstore

2002-01-09 Thread birger
Simon Josefsson schrieb am Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 10:45:52PM +0100: * [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * * > We also built HA for each mailstore, such that it are in fact two * > systems clustered by the kimberlite software mounting a shared * > RAID in a failover situation. See * > * > http://oss.mis

Re: Reliable mailstore

2002-01-09 Thread Simon Josefsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > We also built HA for each mailstore, such that it are in fact two > systems clustered by the kimberlite software mounting a shared > RAID in a failover situation. See > > http://oss.missioncriticallinux.com/projects/kimberlite/ > > for details. Did you considered

Re: Reliable mailstore

2002-01-08 Thread birger
Daryl Tester schrieb am Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 05:58:21PM +1030: * Mark Newton wrote: * * > In any case, what I'm trying to end up with is a system built around a * > large filestore (suitably RAIDed for reliability) with multiple front-end * > systems (for scalability). * > * > I've noticed in the

Re: Reliable mailstore

2002-01-07 Thread Daryl Tester
Mark Newton wrote: > In any case, what I'm trying to end up with is a system built around a > large filestore (suitably RAIDed for reliability) with multiple front-end > systems (for scalability). > > I've noticed in the Cyrus documentation that NFS is not an option for > doing this kind of thing

Reliable mailstore

2002-01-07 Thread Mark Newton
I'm working on a project which involves building a scalable and (mostly) fault-tolerant mailstore. I haven't settled on the software I'm going to use yet, so I'm looking through lots of documentation to try to get a picture of what's out there. In any case, what I'm trying to end up with is a s