Michael Sims wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> Dave McMurtrie wrote:
>> As of Cyrus 2.3, the code supports the notion of application-level
>> replication. It's near real-time replication of all the application
>> data, but one copy of the data isn't live. This is more of an
>> active/passive solution, since
Michael Sims wrote:
Quick question on this. If I setup an active/passive cluster and put the
mail spool AND all of the application data on a SAN that both nodes have
access to (not simultaneously, of course), doesn't that bypass the need for
using "mupdate_config: replicated"? Thanks...
Th
Hi Dave,
Dave McMurtrie wrote:
> As of Cyrus 2.3, the code supports the notion of application-level
> replication. It's near real-time replication of all the application
> data, but one copy of the data isn't live. This is more of an
> active/passive solution, since you have to do something to m
Michael Sims wrote:
> Overall, my general feeling is that active/active is still a bit too
> bleeding edge for me to recommend it to my boss.
Bleeding edge? VMS had this figured out ages ago :)
> I know that it has been
> done, but it seems to be relatively uncommon. I might try to toy around
Hi Dave,
Thanks for taking the time to respond.
Dave McMurtrie wrote:
> When I worked at the University of Pittsburgh, we set up a 4-node,
> active/active Cyrus IMAP cluster. It ran on Sun v440 servers running
> Solaris 8 using Veritas Cluster Filesystem. If you need additional
> d
Dave McMurtrie wrote:
> Though I have no experience with it, I seem to recall that someone
> attempted to use GFS with an active/active Cyrus cluster and it was a
> disaster. It was mentioned either on info-cyrus or in the Cyrus wiki.
> If google doesn't help you find this, I can try to rememb
recommendations do people have for the file system? GFS?
> OCFS2? something else?
When I worked at the University of Pittsburgh, we set up a 4-node,
active/active Cyrus IMAP cluster. It ran on Sun v440 servers running
Solaris 8 using Veritas Cluster Filesystem. If you need additional
detail
Hi,
My company has been a happy user of Cyrus IMAP for over 6 years now. But
our existing email infrastructure is starting to age a bit and I've been
assigned the task of upgrading it. Although we only have about 5,000 or so
accounts, we have experienced some performance issues over the years (f
+-Le 29/12/2005 14:52 -0500, Dave McMurtrie a dit :
| Nikola Milutinovic wrote:
|
|>
|> Are we talking about cyrus murder? I'll definitely take a look.
|
| He's actually talking about the replication code that David Carter wrote.
| Murder only offers scalability, and does not give you any type
Igor Brezac wrote:
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Nikola Milutinovic wrote:
Hello all.
How would one go about building a Cyrus cluster?
Suppose you wanted to make two servers a failover IMAP cluster. The
way I imagine it, the MTA can forward messages to two servers.
Problem is, deleting from one se
Nikola Milutinovic wrote:
Are we talking about cyrus murder? I'll definitely take a look.
He's actually talking about the replication code that David Carter
wrote. Murder only offers scalability, and does not give you any type
of replication of the backend mailstore.
Thanks,
Dave
C
Nikola Milutinovic schrieb:
> How would one go about building a Cyrus cluster?
>
> Suppose you wanted to make two servers a failover IMAP cluster. The way
> I imagine it, the MTA can forward messages to two servers. Problem is,
> deleting from one server will not reflect on the other. I'd like to
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Nikola Milutinovic wrote:
Hello all.
How would one go about building a Cyrus cluster?
Suppose you wanted to make two servers a failover IMAP cluster. The way I
imagine it, the MTA can forward messages to two servers. Problem is, deleting
from one server will not reflect
Hello all.
How would one go about building a Cyrus cluster?
Suppose you wanted to make two servers a failover IMAP cluster. The way
I imagine it, the MTA can forward messages to two servers. Problem is,
deleting from one server will not reflect on the other. I'd like to
build a "mirror" clust
I don't know if in your case a cluster is the better solution. If i
should evolve my cyrus configuration i would evaluate aggregator
http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/ag.html as first possibility. It's a
solution conceptually in the middle between perdition and a cluster.
One point of strenght of ag
We use drbd and heartbeat on the backend mail servers (active/passive,
data is real time replicated from active->passive). Has worked very
reliably for several years, however it is not the most clean solution.
I've heard / read bad things about GFS based shared storage (cyrus wiki
actually has
I am wondering if any of you out there are running cyrus in a cluster?
If so, how did you do it? and how would you do it if you had to do it
all over again?
We are currently using cyrus with perdition which works fine, however,
ideally the situation would be that a user could connect to either IMA
17 matches
Mail list logo
