* Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20040622 00:57]: wrote:
Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 05:25:20PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
The return can be significant. The company I am doing this for provides IMAP
mail services for business. If a filesystem
Odhiambo Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20040622 00:57]: wrote:
Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 05:25:20PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
The return can be significant. The company I am doing this for provides IMAP
Hi Bill,
I know how to set up failover with a backup MX. That's not what I'm
looking for. We have a cyrus-imap server with lots of users
connecting via IMAP, while everything gets backed up, this only
happens once a night. Thus, if the server were to go up in smoke
right before the
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Bill Moran wrote:
The other option is to take what appears to be the best IMAP server out
there (Cyrus) and figure out a way to do real-time mirroring of the
mailboxes. I was wondering if it could be done with Coda, but I don't
know anything about Coda, and it doesn't
On Jun 21, 2004, at 3:25 PM, Bill Moran wrote:
You'd be much better off with some sort of NAS in a raid
config, even if it were home grown, to store the spools.
We already have a home-grown NAS (just a FreeBSD box with Vinum
RAID) but
it doesn't protect me if the machine with the drives has a
On Jun 22, 2004, at 12:57 AM, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
On Jun 21, 2004, at 3:25 PM, Bill Moran wrote:
You'd be much better off with some sort of NAS in a raid
config, even if it were home grown, to store the spools.
We already have a home-grown NAS (just a FreeBSD box with Vinum
RAID)
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Bill Moran wrote:
During my research of the IMAP protocol, I determined that _the_best_
way to store email for high-performance would be to put them in a
database. This is because IMAP doesn't see email as a big blob of
text like POP does. It sees the headers as one
Jan Grant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Bill Moran wrote:
During my research of the IMAP protocol, I determined that _the_best_
way to store email for high-performance would be to put them in a
database. This is because IMAP doesn't see email as a big blob of
text like
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ I don't think that stuffing email into a database is a particularly good
idea since that means keeping large blobs of non-relational data floating
around, something that the filesystem can do a
The other advantages is it would scale like nobody's business. Since the
data is in postgres, you could use multiple backends (replicated with
Slony)
and have the IMAP daemons contact different back ends if the load got
heavy. With a little work, the system could failover silently as well.
David E. Meier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Like I said, we'll never know till someone tries it. It looks like
Dovecot is going to try it eventually, but it seems like they have
other priorities at this time.
Someone already stores mails in a database: Oracle (Email Server and
Collaboration
Hi Bill,
The other option is to take what appears to be the best IMAP server out
there (Cyrus) and figure out a way to do real-time mirroring of the
mailboxes.
Depending on the size / number of messages: how about using rsync and
OpenBSD's CARP?
True, it will not be realtime, but the
Nico Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill,
The other option is to take what appears to be the best IMAP server out
there (Cyrus) and figure out a way to do real-time mirroring of the
mailboxes.
Depending on the size / number of messages: how about using rsync and
OpenBSD's CARP?
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nico Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill,
The other option is to take what appears to be the best IMAP server out
there (Cyrus) and figure out a way to do real-time mirroring of the
mailboxes.
Depending on the size / number of
Christian Laursen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nico Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill,
The other option is to take what appears to be the best IMAP server out
there (Cyrus) and figure out a way to do real-time mirroring of the
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Christian Laursen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
If you are running FreeBSD 5, you should be able to make a filesystem snapshot
and rsync from there.
I suppose I should have commented on that ;)
We're not running FreeBSD 5 on these production
Bill Moran wrote:
Christian Laursen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you are running FreeBSD 5, you should be able to make a filesystem snapshot
and rsync from there.
I suppose I should have commented on that ;)
We're not running FreeBSD 5 on these production machines yet ... but it's
likely we will be
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
Christian Laursen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you are running FreeBSD 5, you should be able to make a filesystem snapshot
and rsync from there.
I suppose I should have commented on that ;)
We're not running FreeBSD 5 on
On June 21, 2004 11:20, Bill Moran wrote:
...
Does anyone have a solution to provide real-time mirroring of IMAP
folders?
...
Hi. I know I'm a little late to the game, but I'm going to posit an
alternative quite different from anything that's been suggested so far.
It seems to me it
Bill Moran wrote:
David E. Meier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Like I said, we'll never know till someone tries it. It looks like
Dovecot is going to try it eventually, but it seems like they have
other priorities at this time.
Someone already stores mails in a database: Oracle (Email Server and
Hey,
I know questions like this get asked a lot, but I'm going to be really specific.
I know how to set up failover with a backup MX. That's not what I'm looking
for. We have a cyrus-imap server with lots of users connecting via IMAP,
while everything gets backed up, this only happens once a
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 13:20:06 -0400, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey,
I know questions like this get asked a lot, but I'm going to be really specific.
I know how to set up failover with a backup MX. That's not what I'm looking
for. We have a cyrus-imap server with lots of users
Andy Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 13:20:06 -0400, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey,
I know questions like this get asked a lot, but I'm going to be really specific.
I know how to set up failover with a backup MX. That's not what I'm looking
for.
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 05:25:20PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
The return can be significant. The company I am doing this for provides IMAP
mail services for business. If a filesystem crashes and service is down for a
while, we can easily lose clients. If we had some sort of failover, we'd be
Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 05:25:20PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
The return can be significant. The company I am doing this for provides IMAP
mail services for business. If a filesystem crashes and service is down for a
while, we can easily lose
Bill Moran wrote:
It's the mailboxes themselves that are difficult to get. Best we've got right
now is backing up the Cyrus mail folders using rsync ... but this is very time-
consuming, and (thus) only done once a day. In order for it to be done right,
Cyrus has to be shut down while it's
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
It's the mailboxes themselves that are difficult to get. Best we've got right
now is backing up the Cyrus mail folders using rsync ... but this is very time-
consuming, and (thus) only done once a day. In order for it to be done
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
[ I don't think that stuffing email into a database is a particularly good
idea since that means keeping large blobs of non-relational data floating
around, something that the filesystem can do a better job of handling... ]
Actually ... you got me
Bill Moran wrote:
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ ... ]
The latter uses one-message-per-file, and ought to work *much* better both in
terms of performance and stability, and in terms of playing nice with the way
rsync wants to back things up.
Doesn't really matter. Fact is, the mail
Keep in mind that storing mail in a RDBMS as a backup requires an
efficient method to restore mail into your mail server's format.
Would it be possible to have a second mail server internal to your
network that would receive copies of the mail from the primary mail
server to store them as a
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ ... ]
The latter uses one-message-per-file, and ought to work *much* better both in
terms of performance and stability, and in terms of playing nice with the way
rsync wants to back things
Lucas Holt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keep in mind that storing mail in a RDBMS as a backup requires an
efficient method to restore mail into your mail server's format.
I'm looking at RDBMS _being_ the native format. Dovecot has this
on the TODO list, but it's low priority for that project.
Bill Moran wrote:
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ I don't think that stuffing email into a database is a particularly good
idea since that means keeping large blobs of non-relational data floating
around, something that the filesystem can do a better job of handling... ]
[ ... ]
During
Just a thought, but couldn't you write the imapd process to act more
like a web application server in the RDBMS scenario. You can cache
data and limit the number of select statements executed on the actual
data store. Although one wouldn't have something like cookies for
sessions, the
Bill Moran wrote:
Hey,
I know questions like this get asked a lot, but I'm going to be really specific.
I know how to set up failover with a backup MX. That's not what I'm looking
for. We have a cyrus-imap server with lots of users connecting via IMAP,
while everything gets backed up, this only
35 matches
Mail list logo
