Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote: >>> Steve Bertrand wrote: >>> >>>> If anyone has a setup that has redundancy for their IMAP/POP >> services, >>>> and a method to keep the changing data relatively up-to-date, I'd >> love >>>> to hear about it.
[ big snip ] > Another approach would be a cluster of Postfix servers and Dovecot > servers behind PF load balancers. We have 3 "POP" servers (IMAP/POP), 9 > Mail Servers, 2 Defer servers and 5 Filter servers that process over 20 > million messages a day without a blip. We can take individual servers > out of the pool for maintenance, etc. Everything is fed to a set of > redundant NAS for the data storage and common configuration files. Thanks Mike, I'm interested to learn a little more about your setup. I was going to take it off-list, but if you can provide some further details, it would probably add long-term value to keep it here. So, a couple of questions: - can your PF load balancers 'sense' when one of the Postfix/Dovecot units are down, or is this a manual change in config to prevent any time-out conditions? I like this load balancer idea. In my environment, it would be trivial to set up a couple of them, throw Quagga on them, and integrate them directly into our iBGP setup. On the other side, I could use VRRP or the like to ensure redundancy from front to back. - do the Postfix/Dovecot servers communicate with each other, or are they simply stand-alone units that don't know/care that they have other peers helping with the workload? - are your filter servers in front of, or behind the load balancers (iow, is all of your inbound email passed through the balancers, and then filtered/processed/delivered in behind them)? - how do all of the pieces communicate with the NAS...NFS? - could you share a small snip of your PF config in relation to load-balancing, so I can get a bit of a better understanding config-wise on how that piece hangs together? (I've never used PF, only IFPW ;) Thanks, and regards, Steve
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature