Cyrus aggregate compatibility.

[Michael Sofka]

On 2015-04-20 17:16, ktm at rice.edu wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 05:11:00PM -0400, Michael D. Sofka wrote:
>> Under the scenario, would 2.5 work better?
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> In our case, the unconstrained I/O caused by the mandatory mailbox
> format conversion on first use would have necessitated a prolonged
> service outage to prevent overloading the system. 2.5 will allow you
> to schedule your conversions while the system is functional. This
> may not be a concern for you.


Hum, it might....  This would drive up the load on the 2.4 system as I'm 
moving mailboxes?

This project is driven entirely by the state of the SAN disks.  They are 
either old with controller errors, or expensive to keep on service, or 
needed elsewhere in a chain of updates.  Plan B is to clone the existing 
2.3 server, but if I can get a new OS and application image in the 
process, I will be a happy camper.  But even doing that is exceeding my 
mandate.

But if a 2.5 image will work with 2.2 front-end proxies, the deferred 
conversion is worth considering.  I do anticipate the moves being 
off-hours, but even off-hours is busy.

Mike


-- 
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/