On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 07:04:01PM +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 07:30:27PM +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote: > > > I took for granted that it was that the client would download all messages > > again since it might be confused by some UID changes. > > Is it correct ? Timo ? > > > But I don't really see > > why (on the IMAP protocol level) and I don't know how to reproduce it.
I'm asking this because I'm investigating if CONTROL may be on a local filesystem (for performance reason) instead of an NFS filesystem : I'm at a point where postfix(+amavisd+clamav) and dovecot on the same machine is too much load. Let's say I've got 2 identical servers and I want to load balance postfix and dovecot between the two. One simple solution would be to : . run postfix on one server (and having a not started ready to run dovecot on it) . run dovecot on another (and having a not started ready to run postfix on it) In such a setup, I would want to quickly be able (if the server runing dovecot crashed) to run dovecot on the other. If CONTROL is local, that may mean starting from crash regarding dovecot-uidlist... Another setup would be to run dovecot and postfix on both servers and to use DNS round-robin, counting on the fact that once a client has done a gethostbyname() or similar, it should have no reaon to change of server (maybe the fact that clients like TB open many connections would cause a problem though). -- Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur <hum...@pasteur.fr> | Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
