Although I’m also a very happy dovecot replication user, I don’t think this decision will be reverted, sadly.
However, despite of messing with NFS, I will try setting up a three-node GlusterFS Cluster to give redundant storage to dovecote as mail store and hope it performs well enough… Has anyone else such a setup (or alternatively with Ceph) in production? Steven -- https://steven.varco.ch/ https://www.tech-island.com/ > Am 24.01.2024 um 23:33 schrieb Gerben Wierda <gerben.wie...@rna.nl>: > > Respectfully, I would like to ask: please do not remove replication, please > rethink this. > > Currently, replication is my life saver. I run two postfix/dovecot combos (on > different operating systems), with dovecot synchronising via replication. Both > are behind a HAProxy running on the router (OPNsense), one as active, one as > backup. > > If one of the two fails, the other takes over, and when it comes up again > everything works fine and is up to date. I have had these kinds of system > failures (very hard to find and turned to be hardware related) and it was the > replication that made me survive the issues (even when I was far away from my > systems). Mail for my small group of users (about 8) never went down, no mail > message was ever lost, no manual interventions to sync were ever needed. > > If I want to create the same level of availability without replication, I need > those two dovecots to use shared (NFS cluster) storage. But then, I have > another single point of failure (NFS storage) again. So, I need two separate > NFS machines that synchronise, Apart from the nightmare of making NFS secure, > it means that I need to double my hardware (from two systems to four) to be > protected against hardware failure (which is my goal). > > The replication service is the perfect small scale solution. Together with > HAProxy, it enables HA in the most simple and effective way. Going the 'NFS > cluster' route is not feasible for me, so if replication is removed and I am > forced to upgrade, I will lose HA. > > So please, take small scale users like me into account. > > Gerben Wierda (LinkedIn, Mastodon) > R&A_IT_Strategy (main site) > Book: Chess_and_the_Art_of_Enterprise Architecture > Book: Mastering_ArchiMate > YouTube_Channel > > On 16 Jul 2023, at 18:54, Aki Tuomi via dovecot <dovecot@dovecot.org> > wrote: > > Hi! > > Yes, director and replicator are removed, and won't be available for > pro users either. > > For NFS setups (or similar shared setups), we have documented a way > to use Lua to run a director-like setup, see > > https://doc.dovecot.org/3.0/configuration_manual/howto/ > director_with_lua/ > > Regards to replication, doveadm sync is not being removed. So you can > still run doveadm sync on your system to have a primary / backup > setup. > > Aki > > On 16/07/2023 18:34 EEST William Edwards via dovecot > <dovecot@dovecot.org> wrote: > > > Top posting because nothing specific to reply to, sorry. > Not exactly sure, but there’s another thread about the > removal of Director in favour of Dovecot Pro on 3.x. > Perhaps this change is related. > > William Edwards > > Op 16 jul. 2023 om 16:33 heeft Daniele > <da...@kernel-panic.it> het volgende geschreven: > > Hello, > > Just like Vladimir, I'm a bit concerned about > this change, and I'd really appreciate if someone > could let us know if the replication feature > (that works so well!) will be replaced or > removed; and, in case of removal, what would be > recommended replacement? > Thanks in advance and best regards, > Daniele > > On 09-Jul-23 9:36 PM, Vladimir Mishonov > via dovecot wrote: > Hello everyone. > > Just saw this commit in the official > Github repo: > > https://github.com/dovecot/core/commit/ > 4c04e4c30fd4817a8b0e11d04d9681173f696f41#diff- > > 5f643d8b0d1eea65d0f3c749d14d42b25a9d60f0f149bface862f5ff348412c8 > > > Looking at the commit details, it > appears that it completely removes the > replication feature. I'm a bit > perplexed by this change and am not > sure what might be the justification > for it. Personally, I find replication > to be very useful, as it allows me to > maintain a synchronized mirror of all > of my mailboxes on my home server, for > use as backup in case the primary > server goes down for some reason. > > Perhaps there's some sort of > replacement being planned for this > feature? Or maybe the relevant code is > simply going to be refactored to a > plugin or external program, and there's > nothing to worry about at all? > > In any case, I'd greatly appreciate if > one of the developers could comment on > this change. > > > _______________________________________________ > dovecot mailing list -- dovecot@dovecot.org > To unsubscribe send an email to dovecot- > le...@dovecot.org > > > _______________________________________________ > dovecot mailing list -- dovecot@dovecot.org > To unsubscribe send an email to dovecot-le...@dovecot.org > _______________________________________________ > dovecot mailing list -- dovecot@dovecot.org > To unsubscribe send an email to dovecot-le...@dovecot.org > > _______________________________________________ > dovecot mailing list -- dovecot@dovecot.org > To unsubscribe send an email to dovecot-le...@dovecot.org _______________________________________________ dovecot mailing list -- dovecot@dovecot.org To unsubscribe send an email to dovecot-le...@dovecot.org
