alex handle schrieb: >> Extra question, what is the better : iSCSI SATA backend or NFS share ? >> NFS share is more convenient to have a failover server. > > Everyone wants to use nfs for mailstorage, because it is convenient, > but nfs is the wrong storage model for mail. > NFS shines on big files but metadata performance is low, too much overhead! > > We currently have a mailcluster with 10000 mailboxes and the data ist > stored on a netapp storage. > If you have a Mailbox with more then 1000 mails, it gets slow over nfs. > > Our new architecuture will look like this: > > No NFS, no iSCSI we use DAS. > There will be multiple dedicated mailbox server in pairs with a small > postfix instance and dovecot. > These Servers will only be used for delivering/IMAP/POP3. > To get HA we use DRBD und Heartbeat in active/passive setup. > In the front there will be a IMAP/POP3 proxy to direct the user to his > mailbox server. > > This setup scales and is cheap, you only have to find a way to > distribute the mailboxes around all mailbox servers. > > I think rackspace email uses a similar setup with drbd and dovecot.
sorry for the stupid question what is "DAS" do you have a link etc for it, to get more info -- Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer Germany/Munich/Bavaria
