Andrew Daviel wrote:
I have read much of the imapd docs, and some of the email threads on
this list, so yes, I've seen "NFS is bad".
However .. we bought a fancy expandable storage system from Sun which
has a native ZFS filesystem exported as NFS, CIFS, HTTP, iSCSI.
We'd like to use it for email from a Linux client (i.e. the mailserver
uses it for user mail directories), as our in-chassis array is full.
We tried Linux XFS over iSCSI on RHEL4, which crashed and burned quickly.
Then we used Linux ext3 over iSCSI, which seemed OK for a couple of
weeks but then bombed. It's possible the iSCSI support in RHEL5 is
better; we have other machines running with that, but not doing mail
with that kind of load pattern.
We use EXT3 over iSCSI on RHEL4 back to a NetApp storage system. That
configuration has been bulletproof for over 2 years now. It is quite
possible the fault lies in Sun's implementation of iSCSI. I have been
told by other colleagues I work with that iSCSI in RHEL5 has better
performance. That may also work better with Sun's implementation of iSCSI.
If we used NFS, then it might (?) be more reliable, and the device
could use snapshotting for backups, which is built into its management
interface.
What are the chances of this working ? There would be no sharing of
files with any other NFS clients, just the one disk mount.
I had this conversation with Mark some years back, let me summarize,
there's no chance it will work reliably.
David
--
David Severance
Central Computing Services
Office of Information Technology
(949) 824-7552
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Imap-uw mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
