<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Good morning,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I have been checking how could we manage for automating master -> slave and slave->master transition. I though one possibility could be having both servers configured in master mode with each being replicating to the other one. I know this was some time ago unsupported and have tried if it worked now in a testing env but it seems it fails too… Could any Cyrus guru confirm that really this does not work (just for avoiding driving myself crazy trying to find the config issue)?.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">By the way, I’m in progress too of automating mailbox movements… from partition, from server… I had a question about renaming mailboxes for moving from cyrus partition… as a safety measure, prior to launch a renm operation (renm <a href="mailto:user/aa@bb.es" class="">user/aa@bb.es</a> <a href="mailto:user/aa@bb.es" class="">user/aa@bb.es</a> different-partition) we block any kind of access to that mailbox (even mail delivering)… and I was wondering if that is really necessary nowadays…. or does Cyrus hold that locks by it’s own?. I mean does Cyrus take care by it’s own, of avoiding mailbox corruption due to a renm mailbox to a different partition?.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Just one more question… when we move a mailbox from a partition (a renm to different partition) to another one… we usually do : </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">- stop replication between master/slave (as a safety measure for having a very last “fall back” if the renm goes wrong). You know, promoting the slave to master would have the mailbox of the failed renaming operation properly...</div><div class="">- renm in the master</div><div class="">- after successful rename, delete from the slave the mailboxes</div><div class="">- sync each of the master mailboxes to the slave… this way among other things, the removed mailboxes in the slave (the dm is done in the slave for causing mailboxes to be resynced again from the master to the slave to it’s new location in the slave)</div><div class="">- start replication again…</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Are all this steps really necessary?. What do you think about it?.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Best regards,</div></body></html>