Not so much of performance that will be a problem, but more of a availability issue. Yes, would be fun to try...
How about Ian's original idea, about keeping certain directories in sync?? Which directories would that have to be, and can a straight 'cp -R' acheive the syncing?? Dave. > I would worry about locking on the databases. Mailman handles > this via a lock file in a common directory, so it should work > even in active-active, but you would still only have one mailman > process able to run on a list at one time. In other words, I > don't think you would get much better performance out of the dual > system since only one at time would have access to the list > databases. > It would be fun to try it out! > > On Wed, 2002-11-20 at 00:17, David Richards wrote: > > How about ACTIVE-ACTIVE sharing the same installation via an > NFS mount (or > possibly shared storage in a cluster)? > > > > D. > > > > Dave Richards Project Manager (Messaging) Information Technology Services Queensland University of Technology ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: archive@jab.org Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
