Mike,
I did not think Len was being condescending, just curious.
Not sure I agree with you about costs of hardware and dedicated machines.
And I think your example is sort of the other extreme! Like everything, we
are all entitled to opinions (and we all have one!) and we usually end up
with a more moderate solution.
Like who out there doing tape backups, also has a backup tape drive?? Sort
of like having a backup car, just to go to work! I know I don't have a spare
car, just to backup my vehicle. True, my wife and son also have cars, and
together we can work out travel when one must be in the shop. And if my car
is trashed (or your tape drive dies) you just get a new one, because now you
'need' it.
And I can understand the need for hot spares, backups and all the rest, but
how many companies really 'need' this and can afford it. So, I do agree with
you in part, too!
Daniel Donnelly
________________________________________________________
----- Original Message -----
From: "MIke Mckay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 3:56 PM
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] webservice crashes can't upgrade
> You have to accept that not everyone is affluent enough to dedicate an
> entire machine solely to email, working on this model and taking service
> redundancy, data redundancy and back-ups into account, to do basic hosting
> with ( email, www, DNS & SQL ) you would need 8 servers, 8 raid cards, 16
> scsi drives buckets of ram and several tape drives not to mention the
> licensing if microsoft is the OS of choice.
>
> So many people will be running multiple services duplicated over fewer
boxes
> especially if in a co-located enviroment which may charge by the server or
> by the "U" of rack space, and although imail may be austensively a ram
based
> product the applications it is co-existing with may not, and not paying
> attention to things such as the swap file will mean the time between
> complete rebuilds or image redeployment reduces significantly, increases
> manpower costs and service downtime.
>
> And if a server has to be taken down because SQL has fragmented the drives
> to a point where it seriously affects performance and the machine has to
be
> taken offline then wouldn't affect Imail if due to financial restrictions
> they were both on that server ?
>
> I think it is slightly unfair to condescend in such a fashion towards
> Daniel, for people on a budget I feel it is a valid and purposefull thread
> that will under the aforementioned circumstances aid the reliability of an
> Imail system.
>
> Mike A.B.S.O
>
> (lutely no letters after my name, wot a dunce)
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Len Conrad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 7:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] webservice crashes can't upgrade
>
>
> > Daniel
> >
> > Can you explain this swap file business? A mail server shouldn�t be
> > swapping at all or extremely little.
> >
> > What has ipswitch found in increasing the hardly used swap file to 3X
> > memory size makes Imail work better?
> >
> > Len
> >
> > http://MenAndMice.com/DNS-training
> > http://BIND8NT.MEIway.com : ISC BIND 8.2.4 for NT4 & W2K
> > http://IMGate.MEIway.com : Build free, hi-perf, anti-abuse 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/
>
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/
