Ian, >From the responses it appears that this is exactly how policyd works. As for the database we are planning on using a mysql replication software called Galera (http://codership.com), which provides synchronous multimaster replication, and is vastly simpler to manage than MySQL Cluster. It even allows you to separate your database servers across data centers (ours are about 100 miles apart), which we have tested successfully.
Thanks. On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:45:49 +0000, Ian Mordey <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm running option 2). 2 active/active load balanced postfix servers with > a seperate policyd on each. The backend is a load balanced MySQL cluster > with 2 active/passive mysql nodes and 2 active/active data nodes. I've not > seen any performance issues at all and we deliver approx. 150K messages a > day across the two servers. > > If you need any more info on our setup feel free to ask. > > Thanks > Ian > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Simon Hobson > Sent: 12 December 2011 16:14 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [policyd-users] Multiple servers > > [email protected] wrote: >>We are looking at setting up a cluster of outbound mail servers using >>policyd, and I was wondering what the configuration of the mysql >>database would look like. Is the database supposed to be independent >>for each node that is serving mail, or is it possible to have all of >>the mail servers pointed to the same database, sharing the cumulative >>logging for policies? >>The only policy we plan on implementing is a limit on how many messages >>a SASL user can send per hour. > > You have a number of options. You don't really want a separate database > per node as you'll just end up with out of sync data and a general > nightmare. > > So your options are (AFAIK) : > > 1) Run one policy server (and backing database) and call if from each mail > server. This is what I've done for a small cluster - and the shared DB is > also used with Postfix Admin. This is what I'd suggest as the load is > actually fairly low, even for a busy server. > > 2) Run a shared backend database, but a separate policy server on each > mail server. > > 3) Run a separate policy server on each mail machine, AND a separate > database (replicated) for each server. > > TBH, I can't see any point in 3 - just a complication too far. Option > 2 may have some merit, but probably limited performance advantage. > > Of course, if you want resilience then you could run a replicated pair of > backend databases, with a policy server each, and split your mail servers > between the policy servers. Or various other permutations. > > > FWIW, when I was having some performance issues (eventually tracked down > to a bug in the version of <something> I was running, I found that my > limiting factor was Postfix - it seems to be limited to about > 2 queries/s to the policy server from each thread. I did some tests and > found I could easily load up the single policy server with multiple streams > of queries and it would chew through them at something like (IIRC) 60/s > even on my fairly low spec machine running multiple guests under Xen. > > -- > Simon Hobson > > Visit http://www.magpiesnestpublishing.co.uk/ for books by acclaimed > author Gladys Hobson. Novels - poetry - short stories - ideal as Christmas > stocking fillers. Some available as e-books. > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.policyd.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.policyd.org/mailman/listinfo/users _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.policyd.org/mailman/listinfo/users
