> What is your technical reason for this suggestion and admonition? I've > been storing mail on NFS servers successfully for almost 10 years now > with tens of thousands of active users. I've not experienced any > problems yet and I don't expect to.
We tried it over a weekend; NFS performance with load-balanced courier IMAP daemons performed much worse than native storage and single imapd's. > I'm guessing you haven't had the need for active or passive redundancy > and near 100% uptime. What if he has more users than one machine can > support? That doesn't appear to be the case. And redundancy can be achieved without NFS. > If a server is down the DNS RR will still redirect users to it. Yeah, and the RR will redirect users to the down server too. Better to leave it to the MX, where remote MTA's will stop using downed servers automatically. Sorry, DNS isn't the proper way to do load balancing. John -- John Madden UNIX Systems Engineer Ivy Tech State College [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes Want to be the first software developer in space? Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ids93&alloc_id281&op=click -- squirrelmail-users mailing list Posting Guidelines: http://squirrelmail.org/wiki/wiki.php?MailingListPostingGuidelines List Address: [email protected] List Archives: http://news.gmane.org/thread.php?group=gmane.mail.squirrelmail.user List Archives: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id)95 List Info: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-users
