> I'm looking at setting up an imail implementation for 3000 users, all
> webmail.
> I asked Ipswitch tech support if there were any white papers,
> guidelines, or specifications for scaling but they said they've never
> generated that sort of information.
> They sent me to the forum... and so, I look to you, my peers for
> guidance.
>
> Any thoughts about 3000 users?
3000 users no problem in one server. We use Imail internal DB...
we have xeon single processor 1 gig in RAM.. and 120 GB HD with hardware
RAID controller. Works very well and very fast for our users -btw we hold
about 150 domains-
> Obviously, if I'm going to do it all on a single server, I'd want to it
> to be as robust as is possible.
> I'm thinking Xeon, dual or quad processor, coupla' gigs of memory, hard
> drives appropriate to 3000 users at 20 megs a pop (total 60 gig).
Way too much.. from my point of view... but in IT, the largest, the fastest
usually is the better.
Xeon Dual with couple of gigs will do.. over 120 GB in HD (recommended)
FYI: I partition C: with 5 to 7 GB aprox and the remaining is for D:. I have
Imail software and containers (folders and subfolders for users) installed
in D:
>
> But is that the best approach? Is 3000 users too many for a single
> Imail server?
No. It can handle it very well.
>Are there scenarios where multiple servers are used? If
> I did do multiple servers how would they be associated?
By peering them but you don't need it.
I would setup an MX20 (spool and forward box) just in case.
Would I have a
> single Imail user database located on one server, or simply deal with
> multiple imail user databases separated logically by server. Would the
> "unlimited user" license cover multiple servers or would I have to get
> multiple licenses?
Since one server can handle it, you will be fine with DB in one server:
using Imail internal DB or even external DB (i.e. SQL). In case of peering -
I don't think you need it- every server has its own Imail internal DB -as
far as I know-.. I don't know how it works with external DB.
> One thing tech support did offer as advice was "don't use RAID5".
> This seems totally wrong to me as redundancy and throughput are the
> primary benefits of using RAID. Unless there's something bad about the
> way Imail plays with RAID5? I'm talking hardware RAID.
> In fact, though I can get 72 gig drives, I'm thinking it would be better
> to get like, multiple 36's, just for the RAID-5 multi-processing
> benefits.
RAID 5 is known to offer very poor performances for mail servers compared to
RAID 1.
I have never had a problem with Hard Drives. I have had problems with CPU
Power Supplies and defective mother boards instead.
Btw, don't forget to add an antivirus to your configuration, either Imail
default options or Declude will work.
We use Declude with outstanding results.
-Luis Arango
______
[Email scanned for viruses by Panda Consulting -www.pandacons.com-]
[Email escaneado contra virus por Panda Consulting -www.pandacons.com-]
To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
