Am 11.11.2006 um 11:47 schrieb Matt Kettler:
I suppose you could use something like NFS so that all systems share
the same DB, config files, etc.
NFS would be HIGHLY not -recommended.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general/72362/
match=sql
In fact, I personally would suggest never using NFS for anything at
all,
and I'm shocked that you'd even consider using it for any production
purpose.
NFS or equivalent has its place and can be made safe enough if
required but I think other issues like concurrent access suggest that
the SQL approach is the way to go.
Besides, the point here is to eliminate any single-point-of-
failure. NFS
would offer no redundancy at all. If the server hosting the NFS share
went down, the bayes DB would be unavailable.
Agreed.
I do not see many mentions of the SQL approach - either because
it is
not used much or because it works so well?
Probably the former. And you're right not to use something like the
SQL backend for a large volume production system. Not because it's
unreliable but because it's still in development and keeping the
schema up to date could become a real headache.
But it's not still in development.. It's the recommended configuration
as of 3.1.0.
SA's SQL support is solid. I personally don't use it, but many here
do.
Yes, sorry I should have read all e-mails relating to the thread first.
Charlie
--
Charlie Clark
Helmholtzstr. 20
Düsseldorf
D- 40215
Tel: +49-211-938-5360
GSM: +49-178-782-6226
