Slashdot Mirror
Infrastructure for One Million Email Accounts?
cfsmp3 asks: "I have been asked to define the infrastructure for the email system for a huge company, which fed up of Exchange, wants to replace their entire system with something non-Microsoft. I have done this before, but not for anything of this scale. Suppose you are given a chance to build from scratch an email system that has to support around one million accounts. Some corporate, some personal, some free. POP, IMAP, webmail, etc are requirements. The system must scale perfectly, 99.9% uptime is expected... where would you start?"
Exchange is for jews.
How do I do my job again?
Thanks
-Hobotron
There is truth in humor.
Be careful. Because of your post, Dan Bernstein is sure to post a long, detailed rant about how you're obviously retarded because won't listen to him, you hate babies, like to kill kittens, etc. Ugh. Man. Qmail _is_ a pile of shite.
Ok dude, what the FUCK. You CAN restore a mailbox without the original Active Directory user as well as without any third party software. You obviously have never used Exchange System Manager. Please, know your shit before posting misinformation!
You run the cleanup agent which shows you the tombstoned mailbox, you can then right click that and reconnect it to any Active Directory user.
Here's a link that will outline all of the steps to recover a mailbox, next time, know what you're talking about before posting.
Recover Exchange Mailbox
The "99.9% uptime is expected" suggests a fixation with Windows NT on flaky servers. 99.9% equates to 876 hours of outage a year. Quite frankly the requirement for 99.9% availability suggests the equirer does not know what they are talking about.
Good job. You wasted quite a bit of time proving in excruciating detail that i messed up, after everyone else alerted me about it.
Somehow i'm not surprised that, in your calc.exe fest, you missed the obvious - I missed a decimal space.
Again, you are completely and totally wrong. Your experience is clearly lacking, anyone with ANY experience with filesystems and with RDBMSs will tell you, you are wrong. Trying to pretend I am making this up for some reason only makes you look even less knowledgable.
You don't care what kind of cache the OS impliments? Maybe that's why you have no idea what you are talking about? Start caring, and start learning. Filesystem reads DO NOT go to disk, that's the fucking point, that's what a cache is, its storing it IN RAM. Filesystem reads go to the buffer cache, if something is not in the cache, the kernel reads it into the cache. Those tens of thousands of users checking every minute are NO LOAD ON THE DISKS AT ALL. The database would cache this data in RAM to prevent disk access, and so does the filesystem. I suggest you read a book on filesystem or even just general OS internals so you understand that what you are saying is total nonsense.
And again, filesystems are much, much, much, a huge fucking enormous order of magnitude faster at performing data updates than a database, especially since the database also has to update its transaction log and indices, and flush them to disk. And like I said, FFS + softupdates makes deletes even faster. Mail servers don't have anything in common with file servers in terms of resource usage? Maybe you should tell that to all the hundreds of huge mail system admins out there who will tell you that you are completely and totally full of shit. Its creating, reading and deleting files, sounds pretty fucking fileserver-like to me. Sticking it in a database makes database server-like, sure. It also makes it much, much slower.
And for your second post, maybe you use windows for your mail servers or something insane like that? But in the real world, the filesystem's buffer cache can and will be as big as it can. Do a top on a linux machine with a 2.4> kernel, and notice how free is almost none? Its using all the spare RAM for the buffer cache. So quit talking complete bullshit and then lying more when you get called out on it.
You zealot monkey faggots are really something else. First you sit around jerking eachother off all day, and now you want to play with real technology? Sorry, OSS cannot handle this kind of deployment. Go back to Exchange and your hererosexual ways. Let whorevalds suck cock all he wants, but YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A ZEALOT FAGGOT MONKEY!
Hrmmm I know that this will invite the flamewar due to Slash's penchant for inviting the open source, Microsoft hating jerkoffs of the world. Probably the reason that WalMart was sick of their Exchange is that it was setup wrong. I used to work for GE which used to be the biggest Exchange install....can't remember exact figures but something along the lines of 50k users global. And it worked.....very well....we all loved it - and yes Microsoft too (notice that i did not say Micro$oft or something else stupid.....can people stop doing that please? It was never really funnny and if it ever was the joke is WAYYYYYY over and past its prime)
So whomever is "sick" of Exchange or doesn't think it scales well or thinks its insecure or whatever - I hate to tell yoiu that you are just doing it wrong. Exchange is enterprise class and the leader in the mid and large corp email market. It is easy to manage, and whoever said they had issues backing it up - yeah you are doing it wrong too. My customers have very effective backup straegies we test with a random restore approach.
So it might make you feel great to stand on your Qmail, OSS, whatever soapbox and pontificate guys but just because something comes from Redmond doesn't mean you can slam it. Exchange is #1.....and it got there and stays there for a reason. That reason is not that Microsoft (not M$ you freaking tools) threatened the IT managers' kids or offered people bags of cash and 3 wishes or WHATEVER other fairy tale you want to create - Exchange is #1 because it is the best. It has the right belnd of everything and the market loved it and still does.
So take your supposedly free software and ram it back up your supposedly free butthole from whence it came. To anyone that has issues with Exchange you are doing it WRONG and should hire someone (and yeah....IBM sucks with Exchange BTW) that knows the platform. The biggest and most successful companies run Exchange......there is a reason.
PS - Yes I like Microsoft (uhhhhh can I say again NOT M$ - crap that is stupid) becaus ethey pay my bills, lower my customers bills and they make great software.....usually.....sometimes there is a BOB in the bunch but not with the core baby!!! Exchange is the messaging KINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG! Way better than Lin(s)u(c)x....huh...huh...huh (ironic laughter)...huh look I made a joke out of the name of it....huh....huh I am so funny.