On Mon, 2003-03-17 at 14:43, Phil Goembel wrote:
> I've been thinking about this too, only for keeping a backup
> server in sync.
> I'm wondering if it would make sense to use rsync to syncronize
> the two servers, and to shut down the mail services while the
> syncronization is taking place.
> The idea is to minimize the time the services will be offline.
> In the case of a backup system, the syncronization would happen
> at regular intevals. 
> For moving to another server, I would think you could do something
> like:
> 1) copy everything over to the new server without shutting down the old
> server, 
> 2) shut down the old server
> 3) use rsync to catch any changes that happened since the time you
> started copying and shutting the server down.
> 4) connect the new server and start it up
> I'm a newbie at this, so I won't be hurt if anyone wants to
> tell me why this is a ridiculous idea. I suspect it may be 
> overkill, for example. I also suspect there may be a simpler 
> way to keep a backup server in sync

I assume you wanted this to go to everyone, so I'm replying that way.

This is a case where NFS mounts, and MySQL replication would come in
handy.  Never done it myself though.


> On Mon, 2003-03-17 at 09:22, Rick Romero wrote:
> <snip>
> > I think that was it.  It's easy enough that you can create the new
> > server, move a bunch of user data over, then test it out. Once your sure
> > it's working 'turn off' the old server, backup all the data, restore it
> > on the new, and put the new in place of the old.  Unless you want 100%
> > uptime, then you'll have to drop the new one in place BEFORE you restore
> > the current data to it.. But that just feels wrong to me...
> > 
> > 
> > Rick
> > 
> > 
> > 

Reply via email to