On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 12:18:22PM +0000, Javier Frias wrote:
> When load balancing a qmail+vpopmail setup... any other directories/files
> I should share across the frontend mail servers besides these:
>
> (details: using cdb, netapp as the nfs storage, syncing with a cental
> time server, running pop3 and smtp on each front end server, and
> possible load balacning qmailadmin)
We're doing almost exactly the same thing.
> /home/vpopmail/domains/ /home/vpopmail/etc/ { open-smtp, tcp.smtp,
> tcp.smtp.cdb } /var/qmail/users/ { assign, cdb } /var/qmail/control {
> evertyhign except me }
Well, that would be a complete list. I would wager to say that it is
TOO complete. Files like tcp.smtp.cdb and several files in
/var/qmail/control and /var/qmail/users are read for every single smtp
connection and/or every single delivery. I elected to keep local copies
of each to decrease NFS traffic.
The only problems we've had have been with munging of the .dir_control
file. I discussed this with Ken and he stated that that is a very
common problem with cdb load-balanced sites. He highly recommended
using MySQL auth for load-balanced setups and I am in the process of
converting ours now. My research indicates that it will make things a
lot easier, as it eliminates all possibility of files being munged by
NFS. If your site is busy enough to warrant load-balancing, I submit
that using MySQL as your auth system will make your life much easier in
the future.
> also, has anyone had any experience load balancing qmailadmin? any
> issues with cdb files getting corrupt ( chances of simultaneous access
> ? )
I haven't had any problems with load-balancing qmailadmin. Works great.
> same question for sqwebmail... should anythign be shared for
> sqwebmail/qmailadmin? would a standard web imap client ( what am used
> to doing ) be better than sqwebmail in terms of load balancing safe?
sqwebmail has been rather amazing. No problems with load-balancing...
Ben
--
Ben Beuchler There is no spoon.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The Matrix
