On Sun, Jul 09, 2023 at 07:06:10PM +0200, Robert Senger wrote: > I've set up a testing environment that also uses master-master > replication of the mysql bayes database, with priority in dns set to > equal for both mx to get incoming mail distributed evenly to both > systems. So far, this seems to work, but this is a low load > environment.
it boils down on how much you trust mysql master-master replication stability and performance, which is heavily dependent on your experiences and exact versions used (are we talking about Oracle Mysql, or MariaDB or Percona forks? which versions? What replication setup? etc.) I've had problems under high concurrent load (not performance, but replication setup breaking) in the past, so I prefer to avoid master-master replication if possible, especially if I anticipate high concurrent load. But if you are confident in it, sure, go ahead. > Any suggestions? Well, how are you training your bayes DB? If it is via cron and manually curated ham/spam corpuses (the recommended way), I'd rather suggest keeping databases separate and simply running training on both servers (you can duplicate or share ham/spam corpuses as you wish, from rsync to SMB/NFS). If you are using auto-learn (which was not recommended last time I looked), well, you'd probably better off NOT syncing bayes at all IMHO, as it should be prefered that risk of bayes poisoning is reduced to one server instead of replicating that (and there is not much benefit, as auto-learn will quickly learn on each server separately anyway, and if one set of domains is not getting some type of spam, it is not beneficial to learn it anyway) -- Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.
