Kolab numbers.

[Bo Thorsen]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Monday 05 April 2004 11:01, Luca Villani wrote:
> Alle 13:50, giovedì 1 aprile 2004, Ian Reinhart Geiser ha scritto:
>
>
> First, I'm afraid my english is very poor, I'm sorry... :-(
>
> We're looking for an Open Source groupware solutions, and we're
> planning testing Kolab next week.
>
> If all working fine, next month will migrate our ~300 Exchange users to
> new groupware server.
>
> We're seeking a clusterizable solution (two old HP DL380 for tests),
> due to our requirement in availability, security and high
> email/workgroup traffic.
>
> All the server will be administered from our SI team, 6 sysadm).
>
>
> Did any of you tested Kolab in a clustered/HA architecture?
> Did you think Kolab working fine in a such environment?

There is no support for clustering in Kolab1. One of the things we're 
working on for Kolab2 is to add multilocation capabilities of the mail 
and LDAP parts. Multilocation is not exactly clustering, I know.

Kolab2 do not have any plans that will help you with failover 
capabilities, but clustering should not be necessary. A fairly new Kolab 
server will happily handle 10.000 users, so even though your machines 
might have a bit of age, 300 users is just not a problem.

Another point for you is that the solution is very easy to back up, 
restore, and mirror. Just by mirroring everything on the second server, 
you would be able to switch to the other server very quickly if the first 
fails.

It is generally a problem for Kolab migration from Exchange, that 
companies try to use their Exchange requirements directly on Kolab. The 
solutions are so different, that a company really needs to change the 
internal policy, or you will end up with overkill in many areas (because 
Exchange is so much slower than Kolab).

Bo.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAc6iSmT99lwfUS5IRAmxoAKCJGFzubz06NZp9FRW8qOTUf3537QCcC9jf
4IP05l3L8UQ/zLFbF3wZnWs=
=v8+3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----