Cyrus crashed on redundant platform - need better availability?

Jure Pečar pegasus at
Fri Sep 10 15:36:01 EDT 2004

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:27:40 +0200
Paul Dekkers <Paul.Dekkers at> wrote:
> Sebastian Hagedorn wrote:
> > Right, works fine for us for the most part. Hasn't always been like 
> > that, but the most recent kernel updates by Red Hat have improved 
> > matters a lot.
> What did the kernel improve? You are not using a clustered filesystem, 
> right?

The kernel that shipped with RedHat AS 2.1 was useless for most of the tasks
i tried it with. About three revisions later it became somewhat more usefull
for non-oracle types of use, but i've rolled my own and am not following the
state of it now.

> > It's good but not perfect. We recently installed a huge SAN and are 
> > now in the process of moving over the mail data to reside there. 
> > Fibrechannel seems to be much more error tolerant than SCSI.

I haven't had problems with the fiber itself, i've only had lots of fun with
the firmware on the disks themselves and some with the qlogic drivers. 

> I still think that it would be best to have two filesystems instead of 
> one, so with mirroring on application level (cyrus)... :-)

I'd rather see murder store a message on two sepparate machines ... Actually
to have duplicated mailboxes in sync over a pool of backend machines, with
murder taking care of backlogs when one of them would go down.


Jure Pečar
Cyrus Home Page:
Cyrus Wiki/FAQ:
List Archives/Info:

More information about the Info-cyrus mailing list