> Yes, I know how failover cluster works. But what if one server > (active) can't process such a load? Suppose, we plan to have 100 000 > users working actively with mail. I understand that it is possible to > use one monstrous server to take all of the load, but I am interested > in load-balancing solution on relatively inexpensive servers. (a) SANs are not that expensive. (b) SANs are *WAY* *WAY* more reliable than *ANY* storage solution you can build yourself for the same amount of money. If you really don't believe that you need to lay of smoking the good stuff. And (b.1) - if you have that many users but can't afford a SAN... (c) Then there is Cyrus replication and there is GFS. There was long thread on Cyrus IMAP, HA, & GFS just back in October. > And what > about slow anti-viruses for 100 000 users' mail? Or to use > load-balanced front-ends connected to single SAN and connected to > anti-virus load-balanced cluster? :-) It doesn't require a cluster to load balance SMTP, traditional and well established technologies will do that for you. Setup multiple SMTP servers and publish multiple MX records. ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/ Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
