On June 29, 2004 03:07 pm, Sylvain Robitaille wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Michael Parker wrote:
> > Why not just setup a master server and have all your mail servers talk
> > to it?
>
> Single point of failure: what happens to the mail when the database goes
> down?  If you have one database server for this type of thing, you may
> as well have a single MX host.

Thanks - I started to respond with this paragraph a couple of days ago and got 
swamped with work and forgot about it.

If there were a way to direct writes to the master and reads from the local 
slave copy, that would be ideal - but I think that defies the way things like 
to work.

I'll be playing with 3.0 when it happens and will report back if I come up 
with anything that works.

Mick

Reply via email to