> -----Original Message-----
> From: centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Benjamin Smith
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:34
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: Re: Huge mailq
>
> On Monday 25 February 2008, Christopher Chan wrote:
> > Hmm...it will still build. To really fix it, you need to do
> one more step:
> >
> > rpm -e --nodeps sendmail
> >
> > Now that is a permanent solution.
>
> Like a hand grenade is a "solution". Not likely to help him
> much, tho. =/
> Doesn't even begin to address his situation since sendmail
> wasn't the problem
> to begin with.
>
> Seems to me that it's a bad idea to use NFS as a mail store.
> For example, the
> RedHat documentation specifically recommends strongly
> *against* it. Very
> flatly:
>
> > Never put the mail spool directory, /var/spool/mail/, on an
> NFS shared
> > volume.
>
> http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-9-Manual/security
-guide/s1-server-mail.html
>
Good to know. This will be new top priority fix.
> Also, NFS has various locking problems which prevent its use
> in a proper mail
> cluster. Read up on sendmail's mbox vs qmail's maildir for
> more details. Not
> suggesting that you switch to qmail, with it's "recompile the
> whole !@#!
> thing every time you change a config option" mentality, but
> it's useful
> information nonetheless, especially when you get into having
> multiple mail
> receipt hosts.
>
> The additional complexity of NFS is what seems to have caused
> this gentleman's
> problem - not only did sendmail itself have to work properly,
> so did NFS,
> DNS, and the spam filter.
>
> How to avoid it? Either:
>
> 1) Reduce complexity. (get rid of the need for DNS, NFS, etc. or
>
> 2) "Beef up" the various pieces so they don't fail - make
> sure you are using
> high quality servers and equipment, or
>
> 3) Increase redundancy, so that no single point of failure exists.
>
> Why is he depending on a single DNS server? Why is he using
> NFS, with it's
> implicit single-point-of-failure rather than GlusterFS, which
> provides
> multiple-primary-host redundancy and automatic failover?
> http://www.gluster.org/
>
These are the types of steps we are taking now.
> -Ben
> --
> --
> Only those who reach toward a goal are likely to achieve it.
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
- -
- Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
- Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100 -
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333 Baltimore, Maryland 21218 -
- -
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you
have received it in error, purge the message from your system and
notify the sender immediately. Any other use of the email by you
is prohibited.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
