Re: question about using MX's for load balancing

To: Horms <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: question about using MX's for load balancing
Cc: tc lewis <tcl@xxxxxxxxx>, lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Jeremy Hansen <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 18:04:47 -0500 (EST)
Well I'm using qmail and just from my experience I don't know of anything
off hand to have a secondary qmail host go ahead and deliver the
mail.  This is something I have to look further into, but as far as using
this method over using an LVS machine to do the balancing, do you see any
pros or cons?


> On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 05:53:18PM -0500, Jeremy Hansen wrote:
> > 
> > This I don't know, but as I understand it, remote mail targeted for the
> > primary is held on the secondary only until the primary becomes available
> > again and the secondary host is only queues the mail.  
> That depends on how the secondary is configures. The secondary could queue
> the mail and then forward it, it could deliver it by some means, it could
> throw it away :) Of course this depends on the mail software you are using,
> but that is just an implementation issue.
> -- 
> Horms
> | jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>