Hi, I think option-2 below seems better or am I missing something with director concept. 1. As director and back-end in same server (broken) not recommended, I need minimum 4 servers (2 for director, 2 back-end IMAP). Indexes and mail must be in NFS shared storage(not optimal), as a user may land on any of the back-end servers (assuming no static mapping of user from pass DB). 2) Proxy_may in passDB (static mapping of users to servers makes balancing little partial but can be admin optimized) can achieve the above setup with 2 servers without director. Here indexes can be on their local disk (efficient)? and mail on shared storage (NFS). Both case I can use RR DNS to get users IMAP traffic to front end. Any guidance on this is appreciated. -- Sincerely, Soumitri Mishra
Another query: Can proxy_maybe be used with director setup. -- Soumitri On 12/7/19 4:43 AM, soumitri--- via dovecot wrote:> Hi, > > I think option-2 below seems better or am I missing something with > director concept. > > 1. As director and back-end in same server (broken) not recommended, I > need minimum 4 servers (2 for director, 2 back-end IMAP). Indexes and > mail must be in NFS shared storage(not optimal), as a user may land on > any of the back-end servers (assuming no static mapping of user from > pass DB). > > 2) Proxy_may in passDB (static mapping of users to servers makes > balancing little partial but can be admin optimized) can achieve the > above setup with 2 servers without director. Here indexes can be on > their local disk (efficient)? and mail on shared storage (NFS). > > Both case I can use RR DNS to get users IMAP traffic to front end. Any > guidance on this is appreciated. >