Stephano, THANKS.
John On 3/8/07, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You can't use the same db table for 2 different repositories instances because the locking is at an application level. You would need to rewrite a distributed locking support (someone did something about this in past: see james-ha project on sourceforge). You can instead simply use the MX solution: the primary will be the only real server including inboxes. the secondary will simply accept mail destinated to the primary domain, but it will then keep it in its own remotedelivery to be delivered to the primary as soon as it will be alive again. Stefano John G. Norman ha scritto: > Hi. > > I'm thinking a bit about failover and James. > > If I'm running two Jameses simultaneously, one on each of two systems, can > they point to the same database-backed repositories ( > http://james.apache.org/server/2.3.0/repositories.html)? > > One would be primary MX, the other secondary. So typically, one would > probably be handling most of the load, though doubtless some senders would > hit the secondary for the usual variety of reasons. > > The load is significant, but not massive; I only use James for bounce > control (everything else on Postfix). > > I saw some ancient discussion such as this: > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=james-user&m=100434648513598&w=2 > > John > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
