Joe Rhett wrote:
My question is, how stable/reliable is 2.2.2? Could I safely use it in
a production environment? I need/want to do virtual domains. Ie,
people logging in with [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rock solid. Less problems than we had with 2.1 stable.
Would you mind
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, Jules Agee wrote:
Would you mind briefly describing the problems you had with 2.1 stable,
and which version you were using (2.1.14/15/16...)? I am planning an
upgrade and I expect to use 2.1.16, unless someone has a pretty
compelling reason to go with 2.2.2. I don't need
Rob Siemborski wrote:
2.2 has better process accounting in the master process. There are
limited circumstances where processes die and master will lose track of
the number of available workers. This is mostly true in
resource-constrained enviornments or when admins start killing processes
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004, Jules Agee wrote:
If I remember correctly, Henrique applies some process accounting
patches to his Debian cyrus-imapd-2.1.15 packages. Is the process
accounting functionality in 2.2 better, or is it basically the same as
what's in those patches? Henrique, can you
My question is, how stable/reliable is 2.2.2? Could I safely use it in
a production environment? I need/want to do virtual domains. Ie,
people logging in with [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rock solid. Less problems than we had with 2.1 stable.
--
Joe Rhett
Hi.
I've been beating my head against my monitor with Cyrus 2.1.17 wondering why virtual domains don't work only to realise I need to use 2.2... DUH!
My question is, how stable/reliable is 2.2.2? Could I safely use it in a production environment? I need/want to do virtual domains. Ie,
