>uh oh, just because it can be done, doesn't mean it shouldl be done.
>
>Unless you have a little family-and-friends low volume mail operation
>(then you wouldn't need multiple Imail servers in the first place), I
>advise against running your mailboxes over the LAN. It's just too
>slow compared to local disk storage. The slowness comes from the
>data rate of the LAN vs the date rate of the local disk PLUS the tons
>of additional code the Imail processor has to execute to access
>mailboxes through a network driver vs local disk driver access. And
>don't forget that the server's shared disk will now have serious disk
>head contention pb's from two or more Imail servers trying to access
>their 1000's of mailboxes.
>
>Anyway, what's the point of putting all your mailboxes for multiple
>Imail servers on a network server? Each Imail server can only access
>its own mailboxes, and none of the others, even if the Imail boxes are peered.
what if the imail configurations (eg. users list)
are exactly replicated in each of the iMail servers?
John
>
>Significantly slower, no redundancy (aka all your eggs going to hell
>in one handbasket), afaics, no nothin.
>
>Len
>
>
>http://BIND8NT.MEIway.com : Binary for ISC BIND 8.2.3 for NT4 & W2K
>http://IMGate.MEIway.com : Build free, hi-perf, anti-spam mail gateways
>
>
>Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
>to be removed from this list.
>
>An Archive of this list is available at:
>http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
An Archive of this list is available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
