Cyrus crashed on redundant platform - need better availability?

Michael Loftis mloftis at
Fri Sep 10 15:22:45 EDT 2004

--On Friday, September 10, 2004 16:27 +0200 Paul Dekkers 
<Paul.Dekkers at> wrote:

> What did the kernel improve? You are not using a clustered filesystem,
> right?

RH kernels tend to coem up with bugs that noone else sees FYI (this is why 
my employer we're switching to Debian...)

> Well, it's UFS2 with softupdates, so yes. I'm afraid the journal was
> damaged in my case, there were serveral complaints while doing the fsck
> about softupdate inconsistencies. (The server crashed once more but since
> I mounted with -o sync now the fsck was much faster. I'll keep it that
> way for now untill we know what's really wrong - it was again with a
> large mail-folder synchronisation...)

FWIW I can't call soft updates a journal.  9/10 times when i have had a 
crash, the soft updates journal either was corrupt, inconsistent, or made 
things worse.  When running with soft updates many times I'd lose many days 
worth of mail on a restart.

> Hmm, I don't expect the problems to be SCSI-related. Maybe it has to do
> with GEOM and SMP in FreeBSD 5.2.1, but not the SCSI-bus itself. (There
> are two seperate controllers for both machines, they never see each other
> on the same SCSI bus...)

Probably not, more likely something funkish in FBSD 5.2.1

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

I tend to agree....

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

More information about the Info-cyrus mailing list