>>
This means only one 'backup' email machine and
some software to keep them synchronized. Seems that this would be a less
expensive and less hardware intensive technique than Rick's.
>>
I agree. Obviously the first machine must have GOOD drives running at least
RAID 1. The second machine could be a cheaper machine running any number of
copy utilities that would only copy the diffs between the two machines. You
would probably want a couple hours time difference between the two machines.
You could even have scheduled task that would copy at 12:00 midnight as
your bullet proof backup and run diffs during the day to a different
partition on the drive.
Your boss would not be happy if both machines got hosed by operator error,
etc.
A duplicate SEND is much easier. Get Imagate. I resurrected a Pentium 133 so
the cost was zero. I could PAY $150 for another one and build a copy and
copy over my postfix config whenever it's updated, which is not very often.
If my BSD/POSTFIX box died (which will never happen) I could just unplug and
plug in my backup. Down time about 90 seconds.
Good luck.
Andrew P. Kaplan, CNE, MCSE+Internet, MCT, CCNA, CCDA
CyberShore, Inc. -- Premium Internet Services -- http://www.cshore.com
--- To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Donnelly
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 11:45 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Redundant Send and Receive
>
>
> Hmmmm, this means one needs at least 2 SQL and 2 File servers, so there is
> redundancy (and cost!) in those.
>
> The best method (modest cost and highest uptime) I can envision
> would be to
> have 2 duplicate machines and a switch over mechanism that puts the second
> server online when the first fails. Just need to tools to perform the
> switchover and the duplication of the files and data from the primary
> machine to the secondary. This means only one 'backup' email machine and
> some software to keep them synchronized. Seems that this would be a less
> expensive and less hardware intensive technique than Rick's.
>
> Rick's method might be better for a system that already uses SQL
> and maybe a
> larger system, so it does have a place in this world. But for a smaller
> email system and less backup costs, I think my way may have some
> advantages.
>
> Using your existing S&F server, the total downtime would be the time it
> takes you to construct a new mail computer, install software and
> data files.
> I've done this in as little as 2 hours (1:50 was in copying the
> data!) for a
> modest sized server. If you already have the computer built and it has
> copies of your \imail folders and files, the time would be reduced to
> something like 10 minutes or so ( changing the IP/hostname,
> installing IMail
> and copying the registry). If your boss can live with that, then you need
> just the hardware and daily backup of your user data to the backup email
> machine. The second machine could actually serve 2 purposes!
>
> Daniel Donnelly
> ________________________________________________________
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick Marei" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 5:38 PM
> Subject: AW: [IMail Forum] Redundant Send and Receive
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > to guarantee imail 100% uptime for a large number of users , here is how
> to
> > do it
> >
> > 2 imail servers authenticating against 1 clustered SQL Server and mails
> > should be stored in 1 clustered file server to store emails, if this is
> too
> > much for you, just use RAID 5 or 10 for storing the mailboxes
> and also for
> > SQL
> >
> > the mail files could be moved easily to a new box and the forwarding
> > information are stored in plain text files in the mailboxes respectively
> >
> > for further details, please contact me
> >
> > Rick Marei
> > i factory.at Internet Services GmbH
> > Ferdinand Frey Weg 36
> > A-1140 Wien
> > Tel: +43 1 577 35 35
> > Mobil: +43 676 95 666 11
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Im Auftrag von Yuri
> Levenfeld
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. März 2001 14:21
> > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Betreff: Re: [IMail Forum] Redundant Send and Receive
> >
> >
> > clustering mail server
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Stephen LaBuda
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 1:08 PM
> > Subject: [IMail Forum] Redundant Send and Receive
> >
> >
> > Ok All, I am looking to implement some kind of redundancy for my mail
> > service. Granted I already have a store and forward box but
> this doesn't
> > seem to meet the needs of the "boss" .. He wants 0 downtime or near zero
> as
> > possible for both sending and receiving mail for our service.
> >
> > Any suggestions on going about this?
> >
> > Thank You
> >
> > Stephen
> >
>
>
> Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> to be removed from this list.
>
> An Archive of this list is available at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
>
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
An Archive of this list is available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
