Monday, November 24, 2003, 5:30:05 PM, Erik wrote:
EB> You're over-engineering. DRDB and Intermezzo are not ready for this. Try to
EB> imagine recovering from a failure in either of these.
ok, intermezzo really seems to be not ready for production, but drbd
makes a pretty stable impression on me
Monday, November 24, 2003, 5:44:49 PM, Nick wrote:
NH> I whole heartedly agree. Intermezzo looks and feels like a research FS,
NH> which its pretty darn good for. Its not a production FS at this point.
ACK - but i hope drbd is better
NH> This is a little nappy if you're going to try and "cluster
Tom Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Monday, November 24, 2003, at 10:51 AM, Erik Bourget wrote:
>> On another note, what would someone expect the requirements of a box
>> running spamassassin's spamd for 2 million e-mails per day would be? I'm
>> gunning for a few dual Xeon 2.4GHz. All
On Monday, November 24, 2003, at 10:51 AM, Erik Bourget wrote:
On another note, what would someone expect the requirements of a box
running
spamassassin's spamd for 2 million e-mails per day would be? I'm
gunning for
a few dual Xeon 2.4GHz. All these boxes do is spamd. I found that a
dual
1.
Erik Bourget wrote:
TuxRelated <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi List,
our current qmail/vpopmail server gets a little unstable due to some
raid problems, so i want to setup a 2-node failover cluster with qmail,
vpopmail and imap. the plan is to use drbd to mirror /home via tcp/ip
t
Hi List,
our current qmail/vpopmail server gets a little unstable due to some
raid problems, so i want to setup a 2-node failover cluster with qmail,
vpopmail and imap. the plan is to use drbd to mirror /home via tcp/ip
to the second node and to use heartbeat to do a failover if the primary
fails.
