Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Zimbra responds slowly from time to time

  1. #11
    jooray is offline Active Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    34
    Rep Power
    8

    Default hmmm

    I am curious too. For our larger implementation, we use Communigate from Stalker, we have 700,000 mailboxes and they in fact recommend using NAS over NFS (we currently use iSCSI and SCSI). It may be because we use Solaris on that server and (since Sun invented NFS in the first place) they have pretty good NFS implementation.

    But I would really like to know more information about why not NFS, if it is a server or client issue, etc. For example we have our storage server running Solaris, so if it is a Linux NFS server issue, it should be no problem.

    I am elaborating if I should keep our mailstore on NFS.

    We have also one installation of Zimbra NE and I'm considering using Hierarchical Storage Management feature to move older data to NFS to our big storage...

    Do you know who wrote that statement? Did someone just try it once, it did not work so you don't recommend it or there was some kind of research?

  2. #12
    dNb
    dNb is offline Active Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    38
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoenix View Post
    Well, there is this statement in the wiki. YMMV depending on the number of users on the system but, in general, it's really not a good idea.
    Thanks, I did see that last night, but I can't seem to find any corroborating information or any more detail beyond that single statement. The wiki says the user COH wrote that statement as part of the initial document import, but that person (who has an account here) has never posted as far as I can tell. Any chance we could get this person to speak here to backfill some of the details people like myself would love to know?

    At the very least, can you say more about why it isn't a good idea (if you can't say when) given a decent NFS server? If you'd prefer I'm happy to burn a support incident and then report back here since this question is of some import to us (and clearly others).

    -- dNb
    Last edited by dNb; 11-30-2007 at 12:33 PM.

  3. #13
    jholder's Avatar
    jholder is offline Former Zimbran
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Thatcher, AZ
    Posts
    5,606
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dNb View Post
    Sorry to dredge up this thread again, but I got a little curious this evening to see what options we had for further expanding the size of our mailstore and decided to see what was currently being said here about Zimbra and NFS.

    Can I ask for a little more detail? Do you mean "some NFS client implementations" or "some NFS server implementations?" I ask because we have a netapp, and they, um, do mostly NFS for a living. Were you suggesting netapp storage doing CIFS or iSCSI when you mentioned it above or do they have an implementation that has worked well?

    Are you at liberty to describe the setup where NFS had problems?

    Thanks for any info you can provide, we just want to do the right thing by our little (but growing) Zimbra implementation.

    -- dNb
    The problem is that there are many many very poor (robustness and performance) NFS server and client implementations out there.

    This causes a lot trouble, and our own experience early on in support, was that many many times we find that bad NFS implementation was the problem - hence our strong stance against NFS.

    Most people (openldap, cyrus-imap, etc) explicitly tell you not to use NFS.

    It is very difficult for Zimbra to support arbitrary NFS setups. We are working on allowing some combinations of NFS and OS distro in the future.

  4. #14
    dNb
    dNb is offline Active Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    38
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jholder View Post
    The problem is that there are many many very poor (robustness and performance) NFS server and client implementations out there.

    This causes a lot trouble, and our own experience early on in support, was that many many times we find that bad NFS implementation was the problem - hence our strong stance against NFS.
    Ok, I think I got it, thanks. If I understand correctly you folks have been burnt by bad NFS setups once upon a time. Presumably a good NFS setup would be fine but you don't have any easy way to define/test "good" before a customer tries to use it and hence warn people away as a matter of course. That makes sense to me.

    It also sounds like you don't want to get in the qualifying game. It would be swell if you could say "works ok with NetApp" and other major vendors who make their livelihood from selling good implementations but I also understand the rat hole this sends you down. On the other hand, you already do a little bit of this by blessing certain OS distributions/versions. I wonder if Zimbra could offer a test suite or someone from professional services who could answer the question in a definitive way.

    As for us, I'm not quite sure what we should do because I'd like a way to have an easily expandable centralized backing store for N Zimbra boxes. I'm sure we could go the iSCSI route but I'm not yet convinced that iCSCI implementations for Ubuntu are more robust or better performing than the NFS implementations available. I suspect my NetApp will hold its own with either access method.

    Anybody here have any experience that they could share?

    -- dNb

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 26
    Last Post: 04-19-2011, 09:24 AM
  2. Zimbra shutdowns every n hours.
    By Andrewb in forum Administrators
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-14-2007, 08:55 AM
  3. zimbra-core missing
    By kinaole in forum Developers
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-02-2006, 11:59 AM
  4. Zimbra Processor Output
    By UltraFlux in forum Installation
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-01-2006, 08:23 AM
  5. FC3 Install and no zimbra ?
    By aws in forum Installation
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-09-2005, 04:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •