Il 16/07/20 12:40, Gerald Galster ha scritto:>> Some missing infos... >> >> - As load balancer I'm using a pair of keepalived with simple setup and >> not the DNS >> - Load balancer algorithm is "Weighted Least-Connection" >> - About 20 domains and 3000 email >> - I'm monitoring my backend servers with poolmon >> - The backend servers are virtual machine (vmware) with datastore on >> "all flash" storage >> >> based on yours notes, I think the better choice is Replication. Correct? > In my experience it's best to keep complexity low because the fewer > components you have, the fewer can fail. With replication you basically > have two independent servers that asynchronously sync emails.I completely agree!!!> > While it would work with loadbalancers/keepalived/director they are not > necessary. If this is the way you want to go you should configure the > loadbalancer to always send the same source-ip to the same backend > (ip stickyness). Mailclients do open several connections in parallel > and they should see the same data.In my setup the load balancers do exactly this, and the director map the same username/email (not the same source IP) to the same backend server. Director setup is not so complex and I trust it> With DNS this happens automatically because ips are rotated by resolvers > and the mailclient gets the same ip for all its connections. Failover > is builtin as mailclients just connect to the second ip when the first > is not reachable.I don't trust DNS load balancing. I saw too many times a client stuck with the wrong (down) IP... This is my experience ;-)> > Replication works reliable with mdbox/sdbox but you should avoid maildir.I'm using and I like Maildir. There are some documentation about to don't use it with replication? Which are the drawbacks? Thanks, Andrea> > Best regards > Gerald-- __________________________ A picture tells a thousand words. To make a picture costs more than a thousand words. A picture is slower than a thousand words. __________________________ TIM San Marino S.p.A. Andrea Gabellini Engineering R&D TIM San Marino S.p.A. - https://www.telecomitalia.sm Via Ventotto Luglio, 212 - Piano -2 47893 - Borgo Maggiore - Republic of San Marino Tel: (+378) 0549 886237 Fax: (+378) 0549 886188 -- Informativa Privacy Questa email ha per destinatari dei contatti presenti negli archivi di TIM San Marino S.p.A.. Tutte le informazioni vengono trattate e tutelate nel rispetto della normativa vigente sulla protezione dei dati personali (Reg. EU 2016/679). Per richiedere informazioni e/o variazioni e/o la cancellazione dei vostri dati presenti nei nostri archivi potete inviare una email a privacy at telecomitalia.sm. Avviso di Riservatezza Il contenuto di questa e-mail e degli eventuali allegati e' strettamente confidenziale e destinato alla/e persona/e a cui e' indirizzato. Se avete ricevuto per errore questa e-mail, vi preghiamo di segnalarcelo immediatamente e di cancellarla dal vostro computer. E' fatto divieto di copiare e divulgare il contenuto di questa e-mail. Ogni utilizzo abusivo delle informazioni qui contenute da parte di persone terze o comunque non indicate nella presente e-mail potra' essere perseguito ai sensi di legge.
>> With DNS this happens automatically because ips are rotated by resolvers >> and the mailclient gets the same ip for all its connections. Failover >> is builtin as mailclients just connect to the second ip when the first >> is not reachable. > > I don't trust DNS load balancing. I saw too many times a client stuck > with the wrong (down) IP... This is my experience ;-)Interesting, I have deployed that dns-based approach where two dovecot servers are replicating between two distant datacenters. A few years ago one datacenter had a major outage and new connections quickly failed over to the remaining server. Maybe this is client specific and/or has improved over time. If the loadbalancer/director approach works for you, that's ok.>> Replication works reliable with mdbox/sdbox but you should avoid maildir. > > I'm using and I like Maildir. There are some documentation about to > don't use it with replication? Which are the drawbacks?Maildir is probably the most robust mail storage format, but it is very demanding on your disks because flags like "Seen" are encoded in the filename. Every flag change needs IO as well as copying/moving/deleting mails, quota, ... A maildir with 100k+ mails can impact the servers overall performance, but as you use all flash storage that may not be a problem. I remembered something about replication and maildir, took me some time to find it: https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/2017-February/107125.html Timo said (Mon Feb 20 10:09:48 UTC 2017): "There seems to be something weird with using Maildir and replication. Haven't had time to debug it and it's likely not an easy bug to fix, so for now the solution would be to use only sdbox/mdbox with replication." I don't know if that is still the case, I can just tell mdbox works for me. Best regards, Gerald -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20200716/3b5d1c57/attachment.html>
Hi All, I am also in a similar environment. I also stuck here. I have 2 test servers with the below configuration. =========================Linux OS - Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 7.7 (Maipo) Dovecot version - 2.2.36 (1f10bfa63) Postfix version - 2.10.1 ========================= Trying to create High Availability. I have added both of the above servers behind a F5 load balancer. I have got a Load Balancer FQDN "intl-dev-imaptest.testorg.com". I have enabled/opened the ports (25/110/143/993/995) on the above " intl-dev-imaptest.testorg.com". When I send 10 emails to "intl-dev-imaptest.testorg.com", then those 10 emails are getting distributed between the above 2 backend servers (5 emails to each server). I see those 5 emails each in both the servers.>From Outlook I have configured the email address using "POP and IMAP", whenI gave the IMAP server as "intl-dev-imaptest.testorg.com" ,then it shows only 5 emails from server1 in outlook and after a few seconds/minutes, automatically it shows/refreshes the other 5 emails from server2. But I am not seeing all the 10 emails at the same time. why? So I tried the sync command. When I execute sync command like below from server1, it reflects the same emails in other server2 also. Then I see the same number of emails in both the servers. Is it not possible to access the both servers emails at one time with the "sync" command? Do we need to run this on all the email boxes on both servers? don't we miss/lose any emails during this sync process multiple times? "doveadm sync -f -u kishore at test.testorg.com remote:vmail at bal3200dev002.testorg.com" Is "replication" and "sync" are same? Why are we not able to see all the emails at one time without the "sync" command? What is the best and easiest way to create High Availability with just 2 servers, like emails should travel to both servers equally and if one server goes down also, another server should take care of the emails/functionality. This is my requirement. My current real time environment: I have around 10 email domains and each domain is having 10 imap emails. In total around 100 email boxes/addresses. We receive around 50K emails in a day to those email addresses. We are using the "Maildir" format in our environment. Want to move to the High Availability option with 2 servers. Please help me to fix the issue. Thanks & Regards, Kishore Potnuru On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 2:33 PM Gerald Galster <list+dovecot at gcore.biz> wrote:> With DNS this happens automatically because ips are rotated by resolvers > and the mailclient gets the same ip for all its connections. Failover > is builtin as mailclients just connect to the second ip when the first > is not reachable. > > > I don't trust DNS load balancing. I saw too many times a client stuck > with the wrong (down) IP... This is my experience ;-) > > > Interesting, I have deployed that dns-based approach where two dovecot > servers > are replicating between two distant datacenters. A few years ago one > datacenter > had a major outage and new connections quickly failed over to the remaining > server. Maybe this is client specific and/or has improved over time. > > If the loadbalancer/director approach works for you, that's ok. > > Replication works reliable with mdbox/sdbox but you should avoid maildir. > > > I'm using and I like Maildir. There are some documentation about to > don't use it with replication? Which are the drawbacks? > > > Maildir is probably the most robust mail storage format, but it is very > demanding on your disks because flags like "Seen" are encoded in the > filename. Every flag change needs IO as well as copying/moving/deleting > mails, quota, ... A maildir with 100k+ mails can impact the servers overall > performance, but as you use all flash storage that may not be a problem. > > I remembered something about replication and maildir, took me some time > to find it: > > https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/2017-February/107125.html > > Timo said (Mon Feb 20 10:09:48 UTC 2017): > > "There seems to be something weird with using Maildir and replication. > Haven't had time to debug it and it's likely not an easy bug to fix, > so for now the solution would be to use only sdbox/mdbox with replication." > > I don't know if that is still the case, I can just tell mdbox works for me. > > > Best regards, > Gerald >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20200716/954a95d6/attachment-0001.html>