Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
It not be because Timo not agree with thiz for switching, if one software not do what you need, you go look for one that does as other says, my manager would command that, I expect you manager also command you same. I have mail from list member who advize me of broken 1.2 version where thiz work in fallover mode, I successful using thiz version now on two server. I know version old and unsupported, but working very nice for how we need, no more timeout message or delays for user logins all week, I am very happy now. On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.comwrote: On 2013-05-30 2:59 AM, Nick Edwards nick.z.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: nobody makes us dovecot true, but dovecot works fine and in perfect harmony with postfix, except this one option. I remember the earlier thread and have been waiting for this option, but now I see Timo has decided to drop the idea after earlier saying it would be beneficial, and seems some people have been waiting for long time for no reason, so maybe time to consider all other options, including server software. Oh, grow up. I can see if this was something that was super critical to a functioning - and I agree that it should be fixed to either work as expected (best), or no longer support the ability to add multiple hosts - but it isn't up to me or you. Just because 'some' people have been waiting for this feature, doesn't mean that it is important to everyone. Now, if you can provide evidence that a large percentage of people desire this feature and it is important enough to them that they might actually consider switching from dovecot to something else (but what choices do you have, really? I know I have no desire to switch back to courier-imap), then I think Timo may reconsider. In fact, he may already be doing so. But the bottom line is, there are other ways to achieve this feature, and I think it is plain silly and juvenile to threaten to switch from dovecot just because Timo doesn't agree with you. Oh - and of course, the very last point... This *is* open source software. I'd wager an entire months pay that if you coded up a solution and provided a working, properly coded patch (that isn't full of security holes and bad coding practices), Timo would accept/merge it. -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
+1 On 5/30/13, Edwardo Garcia wdgar...@gmail.com wrote: As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to use two host, people twitter I ask all along thought this how it work too! On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.netwrote: so better remove the option to specify more than one host instead let people run over years in troubles until they find out that a logical behavior like for postfix is not given for dovecot's mysql-connections - yes i was one of the who thought hey both works the same way until i realized that dovecot has no fun at reboot the replication slave which was intented only as failover and used regulary *it is* dovecots job if it offers more than one host to handle this in a useful way or not support more than one host, but you can't seriously say it's not dovecots job after having a half-baken support implemented Am 29.05.2013 02:52, schrieb Timo Sirainen: I haven't replied to most of the threads recently. Anyway, after thinking about this, I'm thinking this kind of connection fallback handling isn't really Dovecot's job. A load balancer could be configured to do it just as well (whereas LB couldn't do actual load balancing for multiple sql servers, because Dovecot uses long running TCP connections). On 29.5.2013, at 2.09, Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote: But each additional link added to the chain, is one more point of failure, unless he's replied to OP privately I'm amazed Timo has ignored this, since its been brought up from time to time before, if he no longer plans on doing it, he should just say so, so people can look at complete alternatives, we are a long way passed early 1.2 series. On Sun, 2013-05-26 at 17:33 +0200, Daniel Parthey wrote: Edwardo Garcia wrote: Yes indeed, so it seem it does not do at all. For now we disable use two hosts, but thiz not optimum for network. You might try to put mysqlproxy in between dovecot and your mysql cluster and have dovecot connect to the failover proxy (or proxies) instead of connecting the database directly. mysqlproxy makes use of the lua scripting language, where you might want to implement the failover or filter mechanisms you need
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
On 5/30/13, Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de wrote: Am 30.05.2013 03:41, schrieb Edwardo Garcia: As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to use two host, people twitter I ask all along thought this how it work too! where is the problem, nobody presses you to use it, nobody makes us dovecot true, but dovecot works fine and in perfect harmony with postfix, except this one option. I remember the earlier thread and have been waiting for this option, but now I see Timo has decided to drop the idea after earlier saying it would be beneficial, and seems some people have been waiting for long time for no reason, so maybe time to consider all other options, including server software.
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Am 30.05.2013 05:42, schrieb Robert Schetterer: Am 30.05.2013 03:41, schrieb Edwardo Garcia: As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to use two host, people twitter I ask all along thought this how it work too! where is the problem, nobody presses you to use it so what - that makes not bugs go away but i agree there should be more docs on it i.e wiki how can whatever documentation repair a broken by design implementation like using the replicaton slave while the master on localhost is available and throw errors if the slave is rebooted in the wrong moment? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
On 2013-05-30 2:59 AM, Nick Edwards nick.z.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: nobody makes us dovecot true, but dovecot works fine and in perfect harmony with postfix, except this one option. I remember the earlier thread and have been waiting for this option, but now I see Timo has decided to drop the idea after earlier saying it would be beneficial, and seems some people have been waiting for long time for no reason, so maybe time to consider all other options, including server software. Oh, grow up. I can see if this was something that was super critical to a functioning - and I agree that it should be fixed to either work as expected (best), or no longer support the ability to add multiple hosts - but it isn't up to me or you. Just because 'some' people have been waiting for this feature, doesn't mean that it is important to everyone. Now, if you can provide evidence that a large percentage of people desire this feature and it is important enough to them that they might actually consider switching from dovecot to something else (but what choices do you have, really? I know I have no desire to switch back to courier-imap), then I think Timo may reconsider. In fact, he may already be doing so. But the bottom line is, there are other ways to achieve this feature, and I think it is plain silly and juvenile to threaten to switch from dovecot just because Timo doesn't agree with you. Oh - and of course, the very last point... This *is* open source software. I'd wager an entire months pay that if you coded up a solution and provided a working, properly coded patch (that isn't full of security holes and bad coding practices), Timo would accept/merge it. -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Am 30.05.2013 12:54, schrieb Reindl Harald: Am 30.05.2013 05:42, schrieb Robert Schetterer: Am 30.05.2013 03:41, schrieb Edwardo Garcia: As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to use two host, people twitter I ask all along thought this how it work too! where is the problem, nobody presses you to use it so what - that makes not bugs go away but i agree there should be more docs on it i.e wiki how can whatever documentation repair a broken by design implementation like using the replicaton slave while the master on localhost is available and throw errors if the slave is rebooted in the wrong moment? Hi Harald, if you declare this broken, why not fix it yourself, instead of barking to the moon, however the current behave should be written in the wiki, to avoid recover the same questions on the list in periods Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer -- [*] sys4 AG http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc Schiffbauer Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
On 2013-05-30 9:10 AM, Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de wrote: Hi Harald, if you declare this broken, why not fix it yourself, instead of barking to the moon, however the current behave should be written in the wiki, to avoid recover the same questions on the list in periods Well, I'd add that the config itself should complain (with a link to the wiki page explaining the issue) if more than one server is added. In other words, it should tell the admin that it will not work as they may be expecting. -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Am 30.05.2013 15:17, schrieb Charles Marcus: On 2013-05-30 9:10 AM, Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de wrote: Hi Harald, if you declare this broken, why not fix it yourself, instead of barking to the moon, however the current behave should be written in the wiki, to avoid recover the same questions on the list in periods Well, I'd add that the config itself should complain (with a link to the wiki page explaining the issue) if more than one server is added. In other words, it should tell the admin that it will not work as they may be expecting. yes , doing such ,sounds ok to me Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer -- [*] sys4 AG http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc Schiffbauer Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 20:24 +0200, Robert Schetterer wrote: Well, I'd add that the config itself should complain (with a link to the wiki page explaining the issue) if more than one server is added. In other words, it should tell the admin that it will not work as they may be expecting. yes , doing such ,sounds ok to me Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer One thing I have always expected of my people, which was once instilled upon me many many years ago by one of my managers.. is fix the root cause, dont play catch-up patch-up ... in other words, dont apply a bandaid solution when the bandaid will eventually come off. The change to the wiki or print warnings to say this that whatever, is IMHO, only a bandaid solution. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 07:01 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote: On 2013-05-30 2:59 AM, Nick Edwards nick.z.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: nobody makes us dovecot true, but dovecot works fine and in perfect harmony with postfix, except this one option. I remember the earlier thread and have been waiting for this option, but now I see Timo has decided to drop the idea after earlier saying it would be beneficial, and seems some people have been waiting for long time for no reason, so maybe time to consider all other options, including server software. Oh, grow up. Good 'ol charlie boy, you still havnt learnt have you, maybe you should grow up and stop telling anyone who disagrees with you to grow up There is nothing wrong with Nicks statement about considering all options, in fact any executive officer would expect that of people in sys admin positions, if something does not do what you need, find something that does, fanboi-ism and loyalty dont cut it in teh real world Changes never come about unless you put a case forward, which is what four people at least have done so now in this thread, and at least two others who have under a previous thread, so maybe call it six, take into account the number of members on this list who use multiple boxes with databases, then look at the number of those who are not members of this list who use the software, the OP of this thread made mention of twitter, and had replies there. I can see if this was something that was super critical to a functioning how the fark would you know little SOHO boy whgat is critical to anyone else's operations, when you become responsible for a decent size network which demands 5 9's uptime, maybe then, and only then, will people take your little tangents more seriously, Harold and the OP have already stated, as have I, why such a function in its current state, is flawed. Daniel's comment about mysqlproxy is a good interim bandaid fix, but is not suited as long term fix since it adds extra link in the chain which leads to extra point of failure, be it through program error or exploit, I know that Wietse and Timo take security seriously, far more so than Oracle. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 15:10 +0200, Robert Schetterer wrote: Hi Harald, if you declare this broken, why not fix it yourself, instead of barking to the moon, however the current behave should be written in the wiki, to avoid recover the same questions on the list in periods Question Robert, if you think something is amiss with bit of software, or think it can be enhanced by a feature, say with dovecot or postfix, or mysql, what do you do? I bet you do not develop the code and submit it, most system admins would not, you ask the dev team but putting your case forward to them, showing justification if need by why feature is good/bad blah blah blah, so why if tis does not affect you, do you pop in with comments saying those people are just barking to the moon... You and others, namely Mr Marcus, should think about that before you put your fingers back on your keyboard with any reply. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Respectfully, I would disagree, if dovecot offers the capability to use two host='s then you should be able to configure the order, remember, earlier dovecot did this but you claimed it was broken shouldnt have and fixed it, which is why not only myself but another at the time suggested when you were fixing it, to make it a configurable option, it makes little sense to use two hosts otherwise in an ordinary network, where you have nanoseconds response from localhost, but milliseconds, to maybe more if there are network issues when on a second query second database server with network latency. otherwise, might as well delete the second host, I've seen the network lag affect logins, only to disappear once I only change to use only one box, the localhost replicated copy. I ask you reconsider, or, at least put it out there to see how many others agree or disagree with hte feature On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 03:52 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote: I haven't replied to most of the threads recently. Anyway, after thinking about this, I'm thinking this kind of connection fallback handling isn't really Dovecot's job. A load balancer could be configured to do it just as well (whereas LB couldn't do actual load balancing for multiple sql servers, because Dovecot uses long running TCP connections). On 29.5.2013, at 2.09, Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote: But each additional link added to the chain, is one more point of failure, unless he's replied to OP privately I'm amazed Timo has ignored this, since its been brought up from time to time before, if he no longer plans on doing it, he should just say so, so people can look at complete alternatives, we are a long way passed early 1.2 series. On Sun, 2013-05-26 at 17:33 +0200, Daniel Parthey wrote: Edwardo Garcia wrote: Yes indeed, so it seem it does not do at all. For now we disable use two hosts, but thiz not optimum for network. You might try to put mysqlproxy in between dovecot and your mysql cluster and have dovecot connect to the failover proxy (or proxies) instead of connecting the database directly. mysqlproxy makes use of the lua scripting language, where you might want to implement the failover or filter mechanisms you need. Regards Daniel signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
so better remove the option to specify more than one host instead let people run over years in troubles until they find out that a logical behavior like for postfix is not given for dovecot's mysql-connections - yes i was one of the who thought hey both works the same way until i realized that dovecot has no fun at reboot the replication slave which was intented only as failover and used regulary *it is* dovecots job if it offers more than one host to handle this in a useful way or not support more than one host, but you can't seriously say it's not dovecots job after having a half-baken support implemented Am 29.05.2013 02:52, schrieb Timo Sirainen: I haven't replied to most of the threads recently. Anyway, after thinking about this, I'm thinking this kind of connection fallback handling isn't really Dovecot's job. A load balancer could be configured to do it just as well (whereas LB couldn't do actual load balancing for multiple sql servers, because Dovecot uses long running TCP connections). On 29.5.2013, at 2.09, Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote: But each additional link added to the chain, is one more point of failure, unless he's replied to OP privately I'm amazed Timo has ignored this, since its been brought up from time to time before, if he no longer plans on doing it, he should just say so, so people can look at complete alternatives, we are a long way passed early 1.2 series. On Sun, 2013-05-26 at 17:33 +0200, Daniel Parthey wrote: Edwardo Garcia wrote: Yes indeed, so it seem it does not do at all. For now we disable use two hosts, but thiz not optimum for network. You might try to put mysqlproxy in between dovecot and your mysql cluster and have dovecot connect to the failover proxy (or proxies) instead of connecting the database directly. mysqlproxy makes use of the lua scripting language, where you might want to implement the failover or filter mechanisms you need signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to use two host, people twitter I ask all along thought this how it work too! On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.netwrote: so better remove the option to specify more than one host instead let people run over years in troubles until they find out that a logical behavior like for postfix is not given for dovecot's mysql-connections - yes i was one of the who thought hey both works the same way until i realized that dovecot has no fun at reboot the replication slave which was intented only as failover and used regulary *it is* dovecots job if it offers more than one host to handle this in a useful way or not support more than one host, but you can't seriously say it's not dovecots job after having a half-baken support implemented Am 29.05.2013 02:52, schrieb Timo Sirainen: I haven't replied to most of the threads recently. Anyway, after thinking about this, I'm thinking this kind of connection fallback handling isn't really Dovecot's job. A load balancer could be configured to do it just as well (whereas LB couldn't do actual load balancing for multiple sql servers, because Dovecot uses long running TCP connections). On 29.5.2013, at 2.09, Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote: But each additional link added to the chain, is one more point of failure, unless he's replied to OP privately I'm amazed Timo has ignored this, since its been brought up from time to time before, if he no longer plans on doing it, he should just say so, so people can look at complete alternatives, we are a long way passed early 1.2 series. On Sun, 2013-05-26 at 17:33 +0200, Daniel Parthey wrote: Edwardo Garcia wrote: Yes indeed, so it seem it does not do at all. For now we disable use two hosts, but thiz not optimum for network. You might try to put mysqlproxy in between dovecot and your mysql cluster and have dovecot connect to the failover proxy (or proxies) instead of connecting the database directly. mysqlproxy makes use of the lua scripting language, where you might want to implement the failover or filter mechanisms you need
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Am 30.05.2013 03:41, schrieb Edwardo Garcia: As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to use two host, people twitter I ask all along thought this how it work too! where is the problem, nobody presses you to use it, but i agree there should be more docs on it i.e wiki Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer -- [*] sys4 AG http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc Schiffbauer Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
But each additional link added to the chain, is one more point of failure, unless he's replied to OP privately I'm amazed Timo has ignored this, since its been brought up from time to time before, if he no longer plans on doing it, he should just say so, so people can look at complete alternatives, we are a long way passed early 1.2 series. On Sun, 2013-05-26 at 17:33 +0200, Daniel Parthey wrote: Edwardo Garcia wrote: Yes indeed, so it seem it does not do at all. For now we disable use two hosts, but thiz not optimum for network. You might try to put mysqlproxy in between dovecot and your mysql cluster and have dovecot connect to the failover proxy (or proxies) instead of connecting the database directly. mysqlproxy makes use of the lua scripting language, where you might want to implement the failover or filter mechanisms you need. Regards Daniel signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
I haven't replied to most of the threads recently. Anyway, after thinking about this, I'm thinking this kind of connection fallback handling isn't really Dovecot's job. A load balancer could be configured to do it just as well (whereas LB couldn't do actual load balancing for multiple sql servers, because Dovecot uses long running TCP connections). On 29.5.2013, at 2.09, Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote: But each additional link added to the chain, is one more point of failure, unless he's replied to OP privately I'm amazed Timo has ignored this, since its been brought up from time to time before, if he no longer plans on doing it, he should just say so, so people can look at complete alternatives, we are a long way passed early 1.2 series. On Sun, 2013-05-26 at 17:33 +0200, Daniel Parthey wrote: Edwardo Garcia wrote: Yes indeed, so it seem it does not do at all. For now we disable use two hosts, but thiz not optimum for network. You might try to put mysqlproxy in between dovecot and your mysql cluster and have dovecot connect to the failover proxy (or proxies) instead of connecting the database directly. mysqlproxy makes use of the lua scripting language, where you might want to implement the failover or filter mechanisms you need. Regards Daniel
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Edwardo Garcia wrote: Yes indeed, so it seem it does not do at all. For now we disable use two hosts, but thiz not optimum for network. You might try to put mysqlproxy in between dovecot and your mysql cluster and have dovecot connect to the failover proxy (or proxies) instead of connecting the database directly. mysqlproxy makes use of the lua scripting language, where you might want to implement the failover or filter mechanisms you need. Regards Daniel -- https://plus.google.com/103021802792276734820
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Hi, Balls, the silly script (written in largely incomprehensible perl by a predecessor of mine) is supposed to catch mailing lists, and HR won't let us have it auto-terminate or update... :-( Thanks for giving me an another few hours work :-) Alex On 24/05/13 08:54, Edwardo Garcia wrote: Alex, you on long vacation? Hi, I am on leave, returning on Thursday 9th May If your query is urgent, please raise contact the team onitd...@integrafin.co.uk mailto:itd...@integrafin.co.uk. Regards Alex On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Alex Crow ac...@integrafin.co.uk mailto:ac...@integrafin.co.uk wrote: On 24/05/13 08:45, Edwardo Garcia wrote: Halo, (First time posting, please forgive English is not native) Change from Courier to Dovecot 2.1.16 Having two server. Having mysql on thiz two server, one master, one slave. What we wish is slave Dovecot only ask slave mysql, unless slave mysql not work when then ask master, we have Postfix do thiz fallover good, but Dovecot talk to slave and master no mater what, we think thiz defeat fallover as we not want this aktion, but aktion like Postfix. The problemo is can not find Dovecot option for thiz in wiki2.dovecot.org http://wiki2.dovecot.org, is possible? You could set up MySQL in Dual Master mode instead Alex -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by *MailScanner* http://www.mailscanner.info/, and is believed to be clean.
[Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Halo, (First time posting, please forgive English is not native) Change from Courier to Dovecot 2.1.16 Having two server. Having mysql on thiz two server, one master, one slave. What we wish is slave Dovecot only ask slave mysql, unless slave mysql not work when then ask master, we have Postfix do thiz fallover good, but Dovecot talk to slave and master no mater what, we think thiz defeat fallover as we not want this aktion, but aktion like Postfix. The problemo is can not find Dovecot option for thiz in wiki2.dovecot.org, is possible?
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
On 24/05/13 08:45, Edwardo Garcia wrote: Halo, (First time posting, please forgive English is not native) Change from Courier to Dovecot 2.1.16 Having two server. Having mysql on thiz two server, one master, one slave. What we wish is slave Dovecot only ask slave mysql, unless slave mysql not work when then ask master, we have Postfix do thiz fallover good, but Dovecot talk to slave and master no mater what, we think thiz defeat fallover as we not want this aktion, but aktion like Postfix. The problemo is can not find Dovecot option for thiz in wiki2.dovecot.org, is possible? You could set up MySQL in Dual Master mode instead Alex
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
But mysql not problemo, it be Dovecot talk to both, do not want Dovecot to talk to both at same time unless slave (local) copy die On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Alex Crow ac...@integrafin.co.uk wrote: On 24/05/13 08:45, Edwardo Garcia wrote: Halo, (First time posting, please forgive English is not native) Change from Courier to Dovecot 2.1.16 Having two server. Having mysql on thiz two server, one master, one slave. What we wish is slave Dovecot only ask slave mysql, unless slave mysql not work when then ask master, we have Postfix do thiz fallover good, but Dovecot talk to slave and master no mater what, we think thiz defeat fallover as we not want this aktion, but aktion like Postfix. The problemo is can not find Dovecot option for thiz in wiki2.dovecot.org , is possible? You could set up MySQL in Dual Master mode instead Alex
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Am 24.05.2013 09:45, schrieb Edwardo Garcia: Halo, (First time posting, please forgive English is not native) Change from Courier to Dovecot 2.1.16 Having two server. Having mysql on thiz two server, one master, one slave. What we wish is slave Dovecot only ask slave mysql, unless slave mysql not work when then ask master, we have Postfix do thiz fallover good, but Dovecot talk to slave and master no mater what, we think thiz defeat fallover as we not want this aktion, but aktion like Postfix. The problemo is can not find Dovecot option for thiz in wiki2.dovecot.org, is possible? i am not really up2date with your question, but last time, i was involved with it, only kinda master/master solution did work, no problem here with it, but i wouldnt recommend it in general, also many new more database cluster tecs were anounced since my last install, so there may more recent news in that point, wait for other answers Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer -- [*] sys4 AG http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc Schiffbauer Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Am 24.05.2013 09:52, schrieb Edwardo Garcia: But mysql not problemo, it be Dovecot talk to both, do not want Dovecot to talk to both at same time unless slave (local) copy die and this mostly for a good resason to support your argument if you configure localhost and the slave in postfix you can be sure in case of postfix that all day long localhost is used and only if it fails the slave over TCP/IP dovecot is using randomly the manitudes slower salve and to make it perfectly worse if you reboot the slave in the wrong moment you trigger errors on the dovecot side which is not the idea of having redundancy on the mysql side signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 10:24 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 24.05.2013 09:52, schrieb Edwardo Garcia: But mysql not problemo, it be Dovecot talk to both, do not want Dovecot to talk to both at same time unless slave (local) copy die and this mostly for a good resason to support your argument if you configure localhost and the slave in postfix you can be sure in case of postfix that all day long localhost is used and only if it fails the slave over TCP/IP dovecot is using randomly the manitudes slower salve and to make it perfectly worse if you reboot the slave in the wrong moment you trigger errors on the dovecot side which is not the idea of having redundancy on the mysql side This is how an old broken dovecot used to work, then someone complained and Timo fixed it, I asked him nearly 2 years ago whn he fixed it, that since he was changing its behaviour, it would be beneficial for an option to make it work only in failover mode, he at the time said might be usefulbut has said nothing more since, so NFI if he's even given it a second thought or even put it on his official todo list (since this was back in the 1.2.x days) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Halo Robert, Yes indeed, so it seem it does not do at all. Timo or other developer? Are you still plan introduce option? If so, may ask what version? For now we disable use two hosts, but thiz not optimum for network. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de wrote: Am 24.05.2013 09:45, schrieb Edwardo Garcia: Halo, (First time posting, please forgive English is not native) Change from Courier to Dovecot 2.1.16 Having two server. Having mysql on thiz two server, one master, one slave. What we wish is slave Dovecot only ask slave mysql, unless slave mysql not work when then ask master, we have Postfix do thiz fallover good, but Dovecot talk to slave and master no mater what, we think thiz defeat fallover as we not want this aktion, but aktion like Postfix. The problemo is can not find Dovecot option for thiz in wiki2.dovecot.org, is possible? i am not really up2date with your question, but last time, i was involved with it, only kinda master/master solution did work, no problem here with it, but i wouldnt recommend it in general, also many new more database cluster tecs were anounced since my last install, so there may more recent news in that point, wait for other answers Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer -- [*] sys4 AG http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc Schiffbauer Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
Yes, thiz why the slave be localhost on same machine work many time faster, backup host set for master database server as last resort fallover since network traffic bottleneck Hope Timo comment on option, so far he ignore thread, so maybe no plan now. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.netwrote: Am 24.05.2013 09:52, schrieb Edwardo Garcia: But mysql not problemo, it be Dovecot talk to both, do not want Dovecot to talk to both at same time unless slave (local) copy die and this mostly for a good resason to support your argument if you configure localhost and the slave in postfix you can be sure in case of postfix that all day long localhost is used and only if it fails the slave over TCP/IP dovecot is using randomly the manitudes slower salve and to make it perfectly worse if you reboot the slave in the wrong moment you trigger errors on the dovecot side which is not the idea of having redundancy on the mysql side
Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication
What version broken where thiz work like need? Maybe I try. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote: On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 10:24 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 24.05.2013 09:52, schrieb Edwardo Garcia: But mysql not problemo, it be Dovecot talk to both, do not want Dovecot to talk to both at same time unless slave (local) copy die and this mostly for a good resason to support your argument if you configure localhost and the slave in postfix you can be sure in case of postfix that all day long localhost is used and only if it fails the slave over TCP/IP dovecot is using randomly the manitudes slower salve and to make it perfectly worse if you reboot the slave in the wrong moment you trigger errors on the dovecot side which is not the idea of having redundancy on the mysql side This is how an old broken dovecot used to work, then someone complained and Timo fixed it, I asked him nearly 2 years ago whn he fixed it, that since he was changing its behaviour, it would be beneficial for an option to make it work only in failover mode, he at the time said might be usefulbut has said nothing more since, so NFI if he's even given it a second thought or even put it on his official todo list (since this was back in the 1.2.x days)
