0$0201a8c0@scanner> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
If you just want mail delivered to two machines aliases work great for
this
user: user@machine1, user@machine2
It's easy enough to distribute aliases to several machines (either scp
or distributed aliases for ldap, sql etc)
This doesn't solve read write access to the stores. You could build a
IMAP multiplexor that takes user commands and sends them to two message
store machines and returns the response from just one (assuming the
stores are identical) something like this wouldn't be too hard to build.
-> machine 1
Client -> Multiplexor
-> machine 2
You might have problems with the inbound delivery if mail is delayed
going to either store.
We don't have redundant mail stores, but we have distributed mail stores
using a local solution:
http://www.siumed.edu/~pfleming/development/email/
This program could be modified to implement a multiplexor as describe
above just by adding/changing a few lines.
Damian Gerow wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 07:54:40PM -0500, Alain Turbide wrote:
> > The approach I've tested here is using a linux server with a ReiserFS
> > partition replicated between 2 nodes using DRBD. Heartbeat runs on both
> > systems and will switch the slave node to master in the event of a failure
> > in the Master. This scenerio is strictly failover and only one node has
> > write access to the mirrored partition at any one time. By using a
> > journaling file system, this eliminates running fsck on the slave to mount
> > the mirrored drive in read/write. This has been running on a Cyrus
> > mailserver. (Our main server is using Hardware Raid 5 though..) So far
> > never seen any problems, corruption, etc. Speed is very good with the
> > ReiserFS system as far as I can see (even though it's supposed to have a bit
> > higher overhead..). Using rsync works as well but it is difficult and
> > tricky doing a proper resync when the original master comes back online.
> > Here DRBD and Heartbeat take care of this..
> >
> > Alain
>
> Having looked for a way around the problem myself, the best thing I've been
> able to come up with is having the two MTA's store mail in an LDAP server.
> But then you run up the problem of how to get mail out, which is kind of
> funky.
>
> The largest problem I've had with this is that I need to have two MX's that
> both have write access to the mail store, and haven't come across anything tha
t
> will help with this.
