using Cyrus was Re: Re: Planning Mail Server (with low resources)

[robin at bullseye.tv (Robin Mordasiewicz)]

On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Feizhou wrote:

>>>> cyrus is such a pain, and requires more horsepower on a single box.
>>>> It is better to run five really crappy cheap servers using courier 
>>>> over NFS
>
>> speaking from experience. I have used both extensively, and both are 
>> excellent, but I would not leave a cyrus installation in the hands of a 
>> newbie, whereas courier is alot easier to support for people who do not 
>> specialize in mail servers. I dont think its FUD to say that cyrus is 
>> something that an advanced admin may prefer, and a nice thing about 
>> courier is that if you find an old spare machine laying around it is very 
>> easy to integrate into your mail cluster. And a failed courier box does 
>> not affect the rest of the cluster. When a cyrus box fails, there is no 
>> doubt downtime, and you need to know how to fix it as opposed to just 
>> reinstalling another courier box and copying the config files.
>
> You left out the horsepower bit.
>
> Have you ever ran courier-imap with IDLE support in conjunction with fam? and 
> done the same with cyrus?

my point about horsepower is that it is really easy to add a spare machine 
to a courier cluster. If my boss said heres an old pentium, can you 
throw it into the cyrus server pool it would not really help. Wheras 
throwing an old server into a courier pool is very easy and the extra 
horsepower gained is helpful.

If I only had one machine I would use cyrus. It is more efficient, but if 
I ever had the option of recycling secretaries computers for mail servers 
I would use courier.