Hi Timo, Yes it´s related, but I don´t understand '... You'll just need to implement a filesystem that allows distributing a single user's mails to multiple servers ...'.
My idea is just in the direction that we don´t need to care about filesystem, we don´t need any distribuited filesystem...let it be as user wants....at any some proxy level, the end storage can be ext3, reiser, S.O linux, freebsd, and so on. I think that the more elements we insert, the more complex and hard to mount/debug the solution would be. Administrator maintains storage pairs, with any o.s/filesystem he wants- his only work would be to create the accounts and folders at each storage server (if you create a folder - you create at three servers - the same for accounts) and set a database with the servers envolved at the process. The account structure must be sync'ed, and messages will be stored where the users want to. I also like the idea to user some database to store message index. Fernando > On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 11:00 -0300, ferna...@dfcom.com.br wrote: >> this is very weird and (at same time) very interesting approach. Instead >> of put all messages into one maildir and this maildir into one server, >> this "maildir" (?) is spplited among many servers - so, if one servers >> fails the account is still acessible and they move old/big messages to a >> new "cheap" storage - archiving transparently. > > Well, this is somewhat related to the filesystem abstraction that I'm > planning. You'll just need to implement a filesystem that allows > distributing a single user's mails to multiple servers. That's actually > also what I was planning on doing by using some existing database for > that (Cassandra?) And sure it would be possible to implement all of that > on my own, but probably it's too much trouble.. > >
