From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 21 14:28:25 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71E3316A4CE for ; Sun, 21 Dec 2003 14:28:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from Shenton.org (23.ebbed1.client.atlantech.net [209.190.235.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7E4B243D5A for ; Sun, 21 Dec 2003 14:28:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from chris@Shenton.Org) Received: (qmail 83255 invoked by uid 1001); 21 Dec 2003 22:28:20 -0000 To: Mike Tancsa References: <6.0.1.1.0.20031220185608.075ba008@209.112.4.2> From: Chris Shenton Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 17:28:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: <6.0.1.1.0.20031220185608.075ba008@209.112.4.2> (Mike Tancsa's message of "Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:06:55 -0500") Message-ID: <868yl57qm3.fsf@PECTOPAH.shenton.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: large pop3 servers X-BeenThere: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Internet Services Providers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 22:28:25 -0000 Mike Tancsa writes: > As our pop3 requirements grow I want to try and remove as many single > points of failure as possible as well as scale the system as needed. > Is there anything like > http://www.remote.org/jochen/mail/popular/ > being used on FreeBSD ? Does anyone have any pointers on building > large scale load balanced pop3 systems ? I prototyped on FreeBSD but my client's policies dictated a Solaris deployment. :-( I used qmail + qmail-ldap, and use qmail's pop3d for POP and POPS; I also offer courier-imap for IMAP and IMAPS. I have 5 1U servers behind a pair of load balancers; one is the LDAP master, the other are LDAP replicas which also run the MTA, POP and IMAP servers. They all store mail on a backend NFS server (NetApp). (The POPular proxying thing seems like qmail-ldap's notion of clustering which routes mail and users to their respective storage servers. I believe shared storage is more simple and doesn't cripple a chunk of your users if one of the POPular storage servers goes down) The thing that makes the shared storage possible is Maildir storage rather than monolithic mbox-style files; it also greatly improves performance. On the system we're replacing (with qpopper), the disks are constantly thrashing when users check for mail (scan entire file looking for new stuff), while Maildir makes it a simple dir scan. Even worse is when a user deletes a msg from an mbox, requiring copying then copying back sans the target message. Before deciding to go with an entire new system, I did a test using the existing sendmail delivering via Maildrop into Maildirs, then used qmail's pop3d to offer mail to users from the Maildirs. It was much much faster than the mbox. So you could go this route even if you're not a inclined to use qmail.