Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 21:54:36 -0700 From: dannyman <dannyman@toldme.com> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: "Robert J. Collins" <rcollins@hwi.buffalo.edu>, Brian Whalen <bri@sonicboom.org>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: redundant mail servers Message-ID: <20010917215436.V11099@toldme.com> In-Reply-To: <004c01c13ffd$7b223640$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 09:50:46PM -0700 References: <20010917161215.U11099@toldme.com> <004c01c13ffd$7b223640$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 09:50:46PM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > >If you really want reliable mbox file locking on x86 hardware, you > >might want to try Solaris x86. > > There's already mbox file locking in FreeBSD you don't need to go to > Solaris for that. The issue is that there is not file locking in NFS > under FreeBSD 4.X series. You don't want to trust a "production" system to -CURRENT, though. > And if Solaris is your idea of reliable mbox locking I'd hate to see what > you consider unreliable! We use Solaris ourselves and while it's locking > is adequate, I've had a few weird deadly embrace situations happen with it. > And that's WITHOUT using Network Flaying System! When was this? The Smart People I've talked to tout Solaris for NFS stuff ... -danny -- http://dannyman.toldme.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010917215436.V11099>