3 ms·
Sure, but you have 8-30 minutes of annual downtime, all planned by you:) Not too bad;)
by modoc 14y ago
Sure, but you have 8-30 minutes of annual downtime, all planned by you:) Not too bad;)
- rdl 14y agoThat's best-case. I have backup-mx, but no real failover for imap or normal smtp (other than reading mailspool directly on the backup mx). I used to do a crazy flood-fill thing with 3 servers smtp forwarding mail and marking it, but doing mail HA correctly is kind of hard (and then keeping mailstore synced from imap in sync, too).
- modoc 14y agoYeah. We use glusterfs to handle the IMAP sync between multiple VMs for HA IMAP. SMTP MX clustering is pretty straightforward in comparison:)
- rdl 14y agoHow well would glusterfs work across the Internet? Doing local HA with some kind of SAN seems fine, but the thing I'm trying to solve is "entire datacenter goes down, make the user have no more pain than making a new imap connection". It seems like something that would really need to be handled inside IMAP (using some crazy backing store for mail, like a database) to be done well, but maybe filesystem level replication with maildir would be enough.
- rdl 14y agoI wish there were some "best practices in systems administration" for different services, ranging from simple (just set up imap/dovecot) through complex (gmail-scale), per service. There's been pretty good focus on how to do http, dns, and some database services, but not as much recently on smtp, imap, etc.
- modoc 14y agoglusterfs would be fine for your situation. There's just some tuning you'll want to do to handle the WAN situation without performance hits.