On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 12:06 -0700, Seth Mattinen wrote: > So is this targeted as a kind of replication solution then?
Either continuous replication or just one-off user moves/conversions without locking the mailbox and without losing changes done during the move/conversion. I think even using dsync for backups should be considered as two-way replication. If there really are some new mails in your backup server that aren't in the primary server, it most likely means you just lost some mails on your primary server and you need to get them back. Sure if you can think of some other uses for it I'd like to hear. But I if you were just planning on copying new mails from a server with completely different mails, I don't really think dsync should be used for that. Wouldn't it be easier to just have the mails forwarded directly there on SMTP level?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
