- Original Message -
From: "Brian Candler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 4:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Courier-imap] Courier-Imap over NFS or OCFS
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 09:30:43PM +, Brian Candler wrote:
>>
On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 09:30:43PM +, Brian Candler wrote:
> All I can tell you is that we had a big Reiserfs filesystem get corrupted
> last year. Several very experienced sysadmins spent over a week trying to
> repair it. They failed. Much of the data was backups from other systems,
> which w
On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 06:20:44PM -0200, Eduardo Kienetz wrote:
> >recovery with ReiserFS - a limitation that the author freely admits. Once
> >it's corrupted, everything is lost.
> > ...
> >Regards,
> >
> >Brian.
>
> Sorry for this kinda off-topic but a doubt just arose here :)
> What do you mea
On 1/25/07, Brian Candler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:58:03PM +0100, Alan Marco IsiMan wrote:
> ...
> Mirrored pairs of disks will be better, but still nowhere near what the
> Netapp achieves (although maybe sufficient for your purposes, given that the
> NetApp is very e
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 08:11:53PM +0100, Peter Mann wrote:
> > However, what I said was that *sqwebmail* does not have the ability to proxy
> > to different sqwebmail servers, and that remains true.
>
> yes, i know - because "It accesses maildirs directly, and does not use
> an IMAP server"
But
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Mann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Brian Candler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Alan Marco IsiMan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Courier-imap] Courier-Imap over NF
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 02:06:31PM +, Brian Candler wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 10:24:53AM +0100, Peter Mann wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 08:56:51AM +, Brian Candler wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:58:03PM +0100, Alan Marco IsiMan wrote:
> > > > We're going to install a n
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 10:24:53AM +0100, Peter Mann wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 08:56:51AM +, Brian Candler wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:58:03PM +0100, Alan Marco IsiMan wrote:
> > > We're going to install a new email platform and we have a big doubt.
> > > What is better for ou
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 08:56:51AM +, Brian Candler wrote:
> As for OCFS: I have no experience. I see that v2 is supposed to have POSIX
> filesystem semantics, which v1 didn't; Maildir relies heavily on POSIX
> semantics, in particular atomic moves of files between directories.
A point to note
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 08:56:51AM +, Brian Candler wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:58:03PM +0100, Alan Marco IsiMan wrote:
> > We're going to install a new email platform and we have a big doubt.
> > What is better for our /var/mail, OCFSv2 or NFS? I mean, SAN or NAS.
> > There'll be thr
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:58:03PM +0100, Alan Marco IsiMan wrote:
> We're going to install a new email platform and we have a big doubt.
> What is better for our /var/mail, OCFSv2 or NFS? I mean, SAN or NAS.
> There'll be three machines reading /var/mail and writing in it (webmail
> write in se
Hello,
We're going to install a new email platform and we have a big doubt.
What is better for our /var/mail, OCFSv2 or NFS? I mean, SAN or NAS.
There'll be three machines reading /var/mail and writing in it (webmail
write in sent folder and courier-imap in all folders). Courier-Imap is
good fo
12 matches
Mail list logo
