[Dovecot] Dovecot mysql replication

[Noel Butler]

On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 07:01 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:

> On 2013-05-30 2:59 AM, Nick Edwards <nick.z.edwards at gmail.com> wrote:
> > nobody makes us dovecot true, but dovecot works fine and in perfect 
> > harmony with postfix, except this one option. I remember the earlier 
> > thread and have been waiting for this option, but now I see Timo has 
> > decided to drop the idea after earlier saying it would be beneficial, 
> > and seems some people have been waiting for long time for no reason, 
> > so maybe time to consider all other options, including server software. 
> 
> Oh, grow up.
> 



Good 'ol charlie boy, you still havnt learnt have you,  maybe you should
grow up and stop telling anyone who disagrees with you to " grow up"   

There is nothing wrong with Nicks statement about considering all
options, in fact any executive officer would expect that of people in
sys admin positions, if something does not do what you need, find
something that does, fanboi-ism and loyalty dont cut it in teh real
world

Changes never come about unless you put a case forward, which is what
four people at least have done so now in this thread, and at least two
others who have under a previous thread, so maybe call it six, take into
account the number of members on this list who use multiple boxes with
databases, then look at the number of those who are not members of this
list who use the software, the OP of this thread made mention of
twitter, and had replies there.



> I can see if this was something that was super critical to a functioning 


how the fark would you know little SOHO boy whgat is critical to anyone
else's operations, when you become responsible for a decent size network
which demands 5 9's uptime, maybe then, and only then, will people take
your little tangents more seriously, Harold  and the OP have already
stated, as have I, why such a function in its current state, is flawed.
Daniel's comment about mysqlproxy is a good interim bandaid fix, but is
not suited as long term fix since it adds extra link in the chain which
leads to extra point of failure, be it through program error or exploit,
I know that Wietse and Timo take security seriously, far more so than
Oracle.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20130531/2b2cdfd7/attachment-0001.bin>