Il giorno 24/feb/2011, alle ore 18:39, Paul J Stevens <[email protected]> ha scritto:
> On 02/24/2011 10:35 AM, Andrea Brancatelli wrote: >> Pardon me but if you write only on one node the it's not multi master >> :-) > > Even if it's not *used* as multi-master, it can still be *configured* as > a multi-master. I see that was mainly a joke on the words, don't take it seriously. I clearly see the advantage of an hot standby that can be put online with little effort. > >> > >> There are things you have to watch out, like auto increment offset >> and such, but it's not rocket science... (and have an automated >> monitoring script that halts everything if replication goes out >> sync!!) > > Auto-increment offsets will prevent key-collisions, but offsets will > also break imap compliance because the UIDNEXT value may end up being > lower than the next inserted UID, leading to missing messages in the MUA. That's an interesting point I never knew, since I never wrote an imap server.... ;-) As a simple curiosity couldn't the I'd be generated with some kind of time (and something else obviously if message comes in too quick) dependent pattern? > Do you think a scenario where there's an external machine with mta, lmtpd and imapd that is replicated to an internal one where there is only imapd and pop3d would work reliably? IDs would be only generated on the external one when the message comes in, i suppose...? Or maybe when a client saves a new message like a sent message on the "internal" imapd the same egg-and-auto increment problem would appear? Thanks _______________________________________________ DBmail mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.fastxs.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbmail
