Mark Zealey a écrit : > Thanks; these look interesting. We have a similar nas setup but we have > 2 frontend dovecot servers connecting to it and store the indexes over > nfs. Could you please tell me how have you done this configuration ? 2 frontend dovecot proxy with 10 dovecot mda ? We are looking for such a configuration : 2 mda frontend with maybe an active and a passive one !
> We also have around 10 mail servers running deliver to try to keep > the indexes on the nfs store up-to-date. Have you done any tests with > the speed of multiple boxes each maintaining a local index of the > mailbox? No sorry > I suspect in this case keeping indexes on nfs would be the best > bet but I don't have anything to substantiate that claim... > > Also one thing to note with storing things on nfs is that there are a > large number of broken kernels out there (they issue about 10* more nfs > lookup requests than they should) - centos 5.1 had these issues iirc > (though the centosplus kernel and centos 5.2 did fix it). Good thing to know, I'll try to change kernel before my migration ! > Always give it > a good test before you change the kernel on your server... I assume you > are using nfs3; has anyone tried using heavily loaded nfs4 and seeing if > any better performance can be achieved? > > Another thing - I found that dovecot's pop3 implimentation is worse than > courier's over nfs (wait state on our boxes is significantly increased). > I still don't really understand why this is; I suspect it's probably due > to to the indexes being created/updated though I thought these were > meant to be discontinued after a while if it is just a simple > login/fetch all operation. I only mention this because if you are > offering pop then you should really do the same benchmarks for that. > > Mark
begin:vcard fn:Mathieu Kretchner n:Kretchner;Mathieu org:INRIA;Syslog adr;dom:;;2004 route des lucioles - BP93;Sophia Antipolis;;06902 CEDEX email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] tel;work:04 92 38 76 67 x-mozilla-html:FALSE version:2.1 end:vcard
