Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email email@example.com
From: Wietse Venema (wietseporcupine.org)
Date: Fri Apr 27 2001 - 10:12:10 CDT
> On 27 Apr 2001 16:35:17 +0200, Wietse Venema <wietseporcupine.org> wrote:
> > He also want to load balance. And when a Postfix machine dies, he
> > will have to run a new Postfix instance that processes its queue
> > anyway. At this stage it is not practical to change Postfix for
> > shared queue access.
> Ok, so what do you recommend then?
> I still very much like the balancing via the MX record, but the users will
> have to fetch/pop/imap their mail off exactly one server, so we'd actually
> need 3 boxes:
Wait, wait, MX records control receiving mail. The location of
someone's mailbox has nothing to do with MX records. Really.
> 2 Postfix frontends with a shared (network attached?) RAID and
> 1 courier/cyrus/whatever backed server for the users, which also has to
> access that RAID.
Sounds like you're putting more on the RAID than necessary. The
Postfix frond ends could have a local file system for short-lived
queue file storage, and could use LDAP to deliver local mail to
the long-term mailbox server.
However, at some point you may outgrow a single mailbox server
(even though 180GB disks were announced recently, there is only so
much bandwidth that you can get from one box). In that case you
need to either train your users to connect to "the right" mailbox
server, or you need a smart POP/IMAP proxy that connects users to
"the right" mailbox server.
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomopostfix.org with content
(not subject): unsubscribe postfix-users