Cyrus aggregate compatibility.

[Michael D. Sofka]

Under the scenario, would 2.5 work better?

Mike

On 04/20/2015 04:45 PM, ktm at rice.edu wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 04:23:07PM -0400, Michael D. Sofka wrote:
>> We currently have:
>>
>>         Cyrus Front-End servers running 2.2.12
>>         Cyrus Back-End running 2.3.16
>>
>> I have built a new back-end server running 2.4.17.
>>
>>
>> I plan on adding the new, 2.4 server, to the aggregate, and move all the
>> mailboxes.  I would rather not upgrade the front-end servers, since they
>> are be retired (and replaced by perdition or nginx).  This move
>> motivated by the status of the old SAN disks.
>>
>> I know that there is a NOSELECT issue, but any shared folders will be
>> moved as a group.  Are there other issues?
>>
>> Specifically, is the proxy/mupdate protocol compatible?
>>
>> I'm ready to add the new back-end to the aggregate, and run some tests.
>>    Thought it might be good to ask here first.
>>
>> Thank You.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> I am just curious, but why version 2.4 and not version 2.5?
>
> Regards,
> Ken
>

-- 
Michael D. Sofka               sofkam at rpi.edu
C&MT Sr. Systems Programmer,   Email, TeX, Epistemology
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.  http://www.rpi.edu/~sofkam/