Hi Timo, Do you have any experience using Dovecot and Glusterfs ? How about the maturity of Glusterfs in a huge email environment ?
Fernando > On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 12:12 -0300, ferna...@dfcom.com.br wrote: >> Hi Timo, >> >> Yes it´s related, but I don´t understand '... You'll just need to >> implement a filesystem that allows distributing a single user's mails to >> multiple servers ...'. >> >> My idea is just in the direction that we don´t need to care about >> filesystem, we don´t need any distribuited filesystem...let it be as >> user >> wants....at any some proxy level, the end storage can be ext3, reiser, >> S.O >> linux, freebsd, and so on. I think that the more elements we insert, >> the >> more complex and hard to mount/debug the solution would be. > > I mean Dovecot accesses filesystem through a simple abstraction layer. > You wouldn't have to implement a real OS level filesystem, but you'd > implement a "proxying Dovecot-filesystem backend" that sits on top of > real filesystems. It's probably not much of a difference to what you're > thinking about, except in my mind it's entirely isolated from actual > Dovecot code. There's just a simple API that the backend needs to > implement and it'll work with Dovecot. > > BTW. Maybe http://www.xtreemfs.org/ or http://www.gluster.org/ already > does what you're thinking about? I haven't looked at them closely > enough.. >