From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 22 13:47:05 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE3DF16A4CE for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:47:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from serv03.inetworx.ch (serv03.inetworx.ch [212.254.227.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A06443D1F for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:47:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dev@eth0.ch) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by serv03.inetworx.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36413252D6D for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:46:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from serv03.inetworx.ch ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (serv03.inetworx.ch [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 27128-01 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:46:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from serv04.inetworx.ch (serv04.inetworx.ch [212.254.227.197]) by serv03.inetworx.ch (Postfix) with SMTP id EA80C252D69 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:46:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 217.162.71.141 (SquirrelMail authenticated user dev.eth0) by serv04.inetworx.ch with HTTP; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:46:29 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <3016.217.162.71.141.1087911989.squirrel@serv04.inetworx.ch> In-Reply-To: <20040622084726.524bfa39.wmoran@potentialtech.com> References: <20040621132006.2b1a296f.wmoran@potentialtech.com><20040621172520.3544d6fe.wmoran@potentialtech.com><20040621214348.GB63857@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk><20040621175626.3e762448.wmoran@potentialtech.com><40D76DA3.9090809@mac.com><20040621204111.6e684d45.wmoran@potentialtech.com><40D79FF9.20308@mac.com> <20040622084726.524bfa39.wmoran@potentialtech.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:46:29 +0200 (CEST) From: "David E. Meier" To: questions@freebsd.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at inetworx.ch Subject: Re: [OT] Re: What's the best possible email failover solution X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:47:06 -0000 > The other advantages is it would scale like nobody's business. Since the > data is in postgres, you could use multiple backends (replicated with > Slony) > and have the IMAP daemons contact different back ends if the load got > heavy. With a little work, the system could failover silently as well. It would be very nice indeed. > Like I said, we'll never know till someone tries it. It looks like > Dovecot is going to try it eventually, but it seems like they have > other priorities at this time. "Someone" already stores mails in a database: Oracle (Email Server and Collaboration Suite). I set up the Oracle Email Server 5.2 for a company I worked for earlier. And to express it nicely: It was a nightmare! Mails got stuck and rejected because the system was not capable of writing them into the database. Besides, the support for that system was also =0. We were probably the only ones daring to run the system ;-) I am glad I am running cyrus now. Extremly stable and fast. That system was not well thought through at all. I don't know how much work needs to be done for a database email store, but Oracle wasn't (isn't) able to do so. Dave