>> But with applications like mail servers, it's often cheaper to just distribute the load to multiple servers.
>> This also gives you redundancy which is always a nice thing.
Actually, their argument was the opposite. The costs involved in extra mechanical devices, from the servers/cpus, heat build up, electricity, etc, when coupled with the performance gain, and decrease in support/technical issues involved in maintaining a "farm" of servers, was more than made up for in the cost.
They needed quite large mass storage, for their mail server, but for a smaller operation, it might be possible to use a smaller solid state device, and feed it.
I was looking around, and not at prices, but at stats. Seems to be that about 500 meg is where they peg most mail server loads. (Unless you are an ISP or routing hub). So, a 1 gig device would cover most needs. Most PC's can handle 2 gig or more of ram, so it begs the issue, why not set up a RAM disk?
Since the concern is OUTGOING mail, generated to lists, if a device crashes, the _worst_ that happens is that a user or two would get a duplicate mailing.
If your "check" email addresses were the first and the last of any list, you'd know which lists started, and which succeeded pretty easily.
Like I said, I didn't want to jump in, but I've been doing a lot of "retro" work lately, digging into old servers (256k DOS days, etc) and migrating some legacy Unix servers to a more modern configuration. No one uses RAM disks any more... but maybe in this case they can work.
PUGDOG� Enterprises, Inc.
The best way to contact me is to NOT use Email.
Please leave a PM here.
>> This also gives you redundancy which is always a nice thing.
Actually, their argument was the opposite. The costs involved in extra mechanical devices, from the servers/cpus, heat build up, electricity, etc, when coupled with the performance gain, and decrease in support/technical issues involved in maintaining a "farm" of servers, was more than made up for in the cost.
They needed quite large mass storage, for their mail server, but for a smaller operation, it might be possible to use a smaller solid state device, and feed it.
I was looking around, and not at prices, but at stats. Seems to be that about 500 meg is where they peg most mail server loads. (Unless you are an ISP or routing hub). So, a 1 gig device would cover most needs. Most PC's can handle 2 gig or more of ram, so it begs the issue, why not set up a RAM disk?
Since the concern is OUTGOING mail, generated to lists, if a device crashes, the _worst_ that happens is that a user or two would get a duplicate mailing.
If your "check" email addresses were the first and the last of any list, you'd know which lists started, and which succeeded pretty easily.
Like I said, I didn't want to jump in, but I've been doing a lot of "retro" work lately, digging into old servers (256k DOS days, etc) and migrating some legacy Unix servers to a more modern configuration. No one uses RAM disks any more... but maybe in this case they can work.
PUGDOG� Enterprises, Inc.
The best way to contact me is to NOT use Email.
Please leave a PM here.
