Stan Hoeppner <s...@hardwarefreak.com> schrieb:
> On 6/10/2014 3:39 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> Kai Krakow:
>>> BTW: In this context, what's the best approach to put mailboxes on a
>>> separate machine? Let the LDA drop mails into NFS mounts, or let postfix
>>> transport the mails via transport_map into a machine which hosts the LDA
>>> (dovecot in our case)?
>>
>> I recommend Dovecot via LMTP, but NFS would work, too, assuming one
>> file per message. I can't say which approach would handle the most
>> load.
>
> Dovecot's LMTP and LDA both perform index updates during delivery to the
> mailbox. They also enable Sieve. Dovecot's speedy performance is due
> in large part to its indexes. If you use the Postfix LDA to drop mail
> directly into maildir files, Dovecot will need to stat the new files to
> update its indexes, before responding to a LIST command. On a busy
> server this can be expensive, and responsiveness at the MUA may be
> sluggish.
>
> Thus I concur with Wietse. Use LMTP for performance, and to enable
> Sieve scripting.
Okay, thanks to both of you. That are the pointers I need. I'm currently in
the mood of creating a new mail server architecture based on the impressions
from the last weeks:
* mailin server: does MX and outbound mail
* mailout server: handle user submissions only
* transport mails to local domains via dovecot LMTP / to mbox server
* transport mails to remote domains by passing them to mailin server
* bulkmail server: handle user and webserver bulk submissions
* handles mails generated by webservers (e.g. webforms)
* handles newsletters from worker processes
* other bulk purposes
* maybe handle outbound bulk mails
* can transport to local domains directly
* mbox server: handle pop3 and imap requests from users
* accepts no external traffic, just from mailout / bulkmail
* just a receiver for local domains
* maybe handle dovecot outgoing mails (thou we didn't support anyway)
With this setup I can place different policies and rate limits for
inbound/outbound. The mail servers mailin and mailout are named by view of
the user altough the first handles external inbound/outbound, and the second
handles submissions. Access to the bulk server could be limited to user
accounts flagged as such.
Any ideas/suggestions? Do you see problems?
I'm not sure yet if I deploy this to different VM instances or just put
multiple postfix instances on the same machine... I'd probably prefer the
first. There's already a central and separated user db not outlined in this
setup and accessed via mysql.
--
Replies to list only preferred.
