Replication to more than one replica?

[Wesley Craig]

With such a small number of users, you might be all set.  Keep in  
mind that -u only gets users, not shared mailboxes not associated  
with any user.  In UMich's system, we just run tape backups on the  
replica, no need for a second replica.  I've done cost comparisons  
between having two replicas or having the first replica write to tape  
(answer: depends).

:wes

On 10 Aug 2007, at 10:52, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> It would be a way to keep a second offline replica for backing up to a
> tape archive, which is what I plan to do. I realize it's slower  
> than the
> standard rolling replication but the archive is mainly for "ooops I
> deleted that mail" kind of scenario. In fact, I'm testing the setup
> right know with a list of all users. First run will take a while but
> further ones should only take a couple of minutes.
>
> Of course this setup is a workaround and it gets increasingly more
> difficult with the number of users, here we only have around 500
> although many mailboxes are quite large.