Hack Kampbjørn schrieb am Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 10:52:26AM +0100:
[...]
>
> I'm planning an starting implementing a redundant mail system in 6
> months (maybe a year) so it's still only in the ideas fase. One thing I
> wanted to test was using coda as storage and let coda's replication take
> care
Roland Pope wrote:
>
> From: "Birger Toedtmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Second (esp. if you cannot afford the hardware described above) you may
> > set up the heartbeat package from www.linux-ha.org. It is very easy to
> > create failover mechnisms with heartbeat, but there is still the problem
From: "Birger Toedtmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Second (esp. if you cannot afford the hardware described above) you may
> set up the heartbeat package from www.linux-ha.org. It is very easy to
> create failover mechnisms with heartbeat, but there is still the problem
> of data synchronisation (he
Paul Dekkers schrieb am Thu, Mar 07, 2002 at 02:11:11PM +0100:
> Hi
>
> I'm looking for a redundant mail storage. Not just a seconday MX where mail
> is temporarily stored on a second server, but just that when one server
> crashes another server goes on with its normal tasks
Hi
I'm looking for a redundant mail storage. Not just a seconday MX where mail
is temporarily stored on a second server, but just that when one server
crashes another server goes on with its normal tasks.
For mail I think it would be nice if all new messages go to both servers,
and w
