----- "Bo Lynch" blynch@ameliaschools.com wrote:
I would say that we have around 300 users.
Bo Lynch
You'll definitely want to look at a multi-server setup for that. Put your mail/web services on one box and database/LDAP on another. Also, for such a large installation you may even want to look at their commercially supported editions. Last time I checked (admittedly quite a while ago) the pricing wasn't too horrendous and I've heard good things about their support staff.
We've always opted to go with the pure open source aka self-supported version but then again we're running installations with fewer than 300 users. I believe our largest installation to date is ~100 users or so.
Tim Nelson Systems/Network Support Rockbochs Inc. (218)727-4332 x105
On Wed, January 7, 2009 3:38 pm, Tim Nelson wrote:
----- "Bo Lynch" blynch@ameliaschools.com wrote:
I would say that we have around 300 users.
Bo Lynch
You'll definitely want to look at a multi-server setup for that. Put your mail/web services on one box and database/LDAP on another. Also, for such a large installation you may even want to look at their commercially supported editions. Last time I checked (admittedly quite a while ago) the pricing wasn't too horrendous and I've heard good things about their support staff.
We've always opted to go with the pure open source aka self-supported version but then again we're running installations with fewer than 300 users. I believe our largest installation to date is ~100 users or so.
Tim Nelson Systems/Network Support Rockbochs Inc. (218)727-4332 x105
I would have thought that this was a small install:) We probably have at the most around 200-250. I was just guessing for growth. We too opt open source. Is zimbra a resource hog? Meaning do you think it would work with maybe a xeon quadcore with 4gb RAM?
Bo
On Wed, Jan 07, 2009, Bo Lynch wrote:
On Wed, January 7, 2009 3:38 pm, Tim Nelson wrote:
...
I would have thought that this was a small install:) We probably have at the most around 200-250. I was just guessing for growth. We too opt open source. Is zimbra a resource hog? Meaning do you think it would work with maybe a xeon quadcore with 4gb RAM?
Zimbra isn't too bad in terms of resources. We have it running on a system with several hundred users, primarily doing e-mail on a system with a single Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 3.00GHz and 4GB RAM.
My primary gripe with Zimbra is that it wants to take over a machine with its own versions of openldap, postfix, amavisd, clamav, etc., and these are not always kept current. We have one Zimbra system running as a VM under the free VMware server, allowing us to screen incoming and outgoing e-mail with current versions of amavisd and clamav before passing it to the VM for final delivery.
Zimbra also works independently of the Linux user system, which some consider a feature, but I don't like as I like to be able to handle many things at the user's $HOME directory level. In particular we normally use courier-imap with Maildir storage, and our own server-side filtering and routing before delivery.
Bill
On Wed, January 7, 2009 3:59 pm, Bill Campbell wrote:
On Wed, Jan 07, 2009, Bo Lynch wrote:
On Wed, January 7, 2009 3:38 pm, Tim Nelson wrote:
...
I would have thought that this was a small install:) We probably have at the most around 200-250. I was just guessing for growth. We too opt open source. Is zimbra a resource hog? Meaning do you think it would work with maybe a xeon quadcore with 4gb RAM?
Zimbra isn't too bad in terms of resources. We have it running on a system with several hundred users, primarily doing e-mail on a system with a single Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 3.00GHz and 4GB RAM.
My primary gripe with Zimbra is that it wants to take over a machine with its own versions of openldap, postfix, amavisd, clamav, etc., and these are not always kept current. We have one Zimbra system running as a VM under the free VMware server, allowing us to screen incoming and outgoing e-mail with current versions of amavisd and clamav before passing it to the VM for final delivery.
Zimbra also works independently of the Linux user system, which some consider a feature, but I don't like as I like to be able to handle many things at the user's $HOME directory level. In particular we normally use courier-imap with Maildir storage, and our own server-side filtering and routing before delivery.
Bill
INTERNET: bill@celestial.com Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC URL: http://www.celestial.com/ PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way Voice: (206) 236-1676 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820 Fax: (206) 232-9186
So are you required to run zimbras release of these packages?
If you are forced to use them then how delayed are the releases. Are you able to use something other than amavis and clam for scanning?? We use a product called VAMS released by central command for spam and antivirus on our mail server currently. These guys are very generous with pricing when it comes to educational facilities in case anyone is looking.
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 18:54 -0500, Bo Lynch wrote:
So are you required to run zimbras release of these packages?
If you are forced to use them then how delayed are the releases. Are you able to use something other than amavis and clam for scanning?? We use a product called VAMS released by central command for spam and antivirus on our mail server currently. These guys are very generous with pricing when it comes to educational facilities in case anyone is looking.
---- zimbra is pretty much of a closed box in that they have already decided what / how / where you will run stuff and no, you can't run anything other than the way they have decided it unless you decide to put a box in front of the zimbra server to receive mail first before you pass it to the zimbra box.
zimbra is also not a lightweight system by any means.
There are a lot of schools running Horde/IMP/etc.
Craig
On Wed, January 7, 2009 7:19 pm, Craig White wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 18:54 -0500, Bo Lynch wrote:
So are you required to run zimbras release of these packages?
If you are forced to use them then how delayed are the releases. Are you able to use something other than amavis and clam for scanning?? We use a product called VAMS released by central command for spam and antivirus on our mail server currently. These guys are very generous with pricing when it comes to educational facilities in case anyone is looking.
zimbra is pretty much of a closed box in that they have already decided what / how / where you will run stuff and no, you can't run anything other than the way they have decided it unless you decide to put a box in front of the zimbra server to receive mail first before you pass it to the zimbra box.
zimbra is also not a lightweight system by any means.
There are a lot of schools running Horde/IMP/etc.
Craig
I have been looking at both and the thing that concerns me with zimbra is the closed box scenario and the EULA. I was assuming that its was license was going to be GPL. But its YPL Yahoo. Does anyone think this is something to be concerned with in the future? Meaning down the road zimbra closes its open source edition?
What does Horde really lack from zimbra?
Bo
On Fri, Jan 09, 2009, Bo Lynch wrote:
On Wed, January 7, 2009 7:19 pm, Craig White wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 18:54 -0500, Bo Lynch wrote:
...
zimbra is pretty much of a closed box in that they have already decided what / how / where you will run stuff and no, you can't run anything other than the way they have decided it unless you decide to put a box in front of the zimbra server to receive mail first before you pass it to the zimbra box.
zimbra is also not a lightweight system by any means.
There are a lot of schools running Horde/IMP/etc.
Craig
I have been looking at both and the thing that concerns me with zimbra is the closed box scenario and the EULA. I was assuming that its was license was going to be GPL. But its YPL Yahoo. Does anyone think this is something to be concerned with in the future? Meaning down the road zimbra closes its open source edition?
What does Horde really lack from zimbra?
Easy conversion from existing Exchange servers.
This is not something I personally care or know much about as I have never voluntarily used any Microsoft Windows systems or software, but there are many who do.
We have migrated such customers from Exchange to Zimbra, and use Samba as well with good results. Most of these systems run Zimbra in a VMware Server CentOS virtual machine on a CentOS host. The VM runs only Zimbra, while everything else of interest runs on the host machine.
Bill
Hi - when I'm running CentOS 4.4, and I run the command
yum update nfs
which version of NFS do I get - the version for CentOS 4.4, or the version for CentOS 4.7 (which I presume is the latest release)?
Any help would be appreciated.
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 1:40 AM, Agile Aspect agile.aspect@gmail.com wrote:
Hi - when I'm running CentOS 4.4, and I run the command
yum update nfs
which version of NFS do I get - the version for CentOS 4.4, or the version for CentOS 4.7 (which I presume is the latest release)?
Any help would be appreciated.
I believe you always get the latest release and if you "yum update", your box would be updated, from 4.4 to 4.7
On Wed, January 7, 2009 7:19 pm, Craig White wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 18:54 -0500, Bo Lynch wrote:
So are you required to run zimbras release of these packages?
If you are forced to use them then how delayed are the releases. Are you able to use something other than amavis and clam for scanning?? We use a product called VAMS released by central command for spam and antivirus on our mail server currently. These guys are very generous with pricing when it comes to educational facilities in case anyone is looking.
zimbra is pretty much of a closed box in that they have already decided what / how / where you will run stuff and no, you can't run anything other than the way they have decided it unless you decide to put a box in front of the zimbra server to receive mail first before you pass it to the zimbra box.
zimbra is also not a lightweight system by any means.
There are a lot of schools running Horde/IMP/etc.
Craig
Can you use postfix with horde/imp?
Bo
On Fri, January 9, 2009 11:31 am, Rainer Duffner wrote:
Bo Lynch schrieb:
Can you use postfix with horde/imp?
Well, postfix is just a MTA. IMP will use localhost:25 or /usr/lib/sendmail to send mail ;-)
What's more interesting is the choice of IMAP-server ;-)
Rainer _______________________________________________
We currently use dovecot. Any issues that you know of?
Bo
Bo Lynch schrieb:
On Fri, January 9, 2009 11:31 am, Rainer Duffner wrote:
Bo Lynch schrieb:
Can you use postfix with horde/imp?
Well, postfix is just a MTA. IMP will use localhost:25 or /usr/lib/sendmail to send mail ;-)
What's more interesting is the choice of IMAP-server ;-)
Rainer _______________________________________________
We currently use dovecot. Any issues that you know of?
Hm. I use dovecot, too, on my private mailserver - but I don't have a webmail setup there, because I use IMAP exclusively. I always wanted to try IMP/DIMP again, but never really got around to install and configure it.
Dovecot is very fast, so IMP should perform well. When you want to continue using your current mail-platform (which is reasonable), you will have to find something that integrates well with it. OpenXchange can do that, but it will need to integrate into your provisioning-infrastructure. It's not a drop-in replacement (nothing is, once it's sufficiently complicated).
I know one ISP here, that tried to use IMP and it performed very bad. They went with OpenXchange in the end - but they have lot's more users than you ;-)
Regards, Rainer
Can you use postfix with horde/imp?
Yes, Horde doesn't care what the SMTP provider is so long as it works.
Well, postfix is just a MTA. IMP will use localhost:25 or /usr/lib/sendmail to send mail ;-) What's more interesting is the choice of IMAP-server ;-)
Yep.
We currently use dovecot. Any issues that you know of?
No issues.
Hm. I use dovecot, too, on my private mailserver - but I don't have a webmail setup there, because I use IMAP exclusively. I always wanted to try IMP/DIMP again, but never really got around to install and configure it.
We use Horde/IMP (and testing DIMP) to provide web mail to our low-end users. Horde is great stuff, works across browsers well, is stable, and deals with every tortured mail message (including ones that wig out either Thunderbird [not really very hard to do :(] or Outlook]. For groupware we use OpenGroupware, and Horde is very easy to integrate into almost anything.
I know one ISP here, that tried to use IMP and it performed very bad.
They set it up wrong.
on 1-9-2009 8:21 AM Bo Lynch spake the following:
On Fri, January 9, 2009 11:31 am, Rainer Duffner wrote:
Bo Lynch schrieb:
Can you use postfix with horde/imp?
Well, postfix is just a MTA. IMP will use localhost:25 or /usr/lib/sendmail to send mail ;-)
What's more interesting is the choice of IMAP-server ;-)
Rainer _______________________________________________
We currently use dovecot. Any issues that you know of?
Bo
I am running the latest horde webmail edition as a test and it seems to run great with dovecot. But you should install it on CentOS 5 because you get some errors on the older PHP in CentOS 4.
I just dl'd the tarball and expanded it below the webroot and followed the INSTALL docs.
On Fri, January 9, 2009 11:31 am, Rainer Duffner wrote:
Bo Lynch schrieb:
Can you use postfix with horde/imp?
Well, postfix is just a MTA. IMP will use localhost:25 or /usr/lib/sendmail to send mail ;-)
What's more interesting is the choice of IMAP-server ;-)
Rainer _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Any issues using dovecot?
Bo
Am 08.01.2009 um 00:54 schrieb Bo Lynch:
So are you required to run zimbras release of these packages?
For Zimbra, yes. But honestly: how on earth would they be able to guarantee that it's working correctly in any other meaningful way? Would you like to do support for your product that relies on a dozen or more external other products (that aren't maintained in most Enterprise Linux distributions anyway) when any of the vendors you support the product on can introduce a patch anyday that changes some stuff only you need in your software - and now you have customers all over the world phoning you why your P-O-S-software stopped working out- of-a-sudden.
They have to maintain their own releases.
If you are forced to use them then how delayed are the releases.
There's a new release every couple of months. See http://pm.zimbra.com It's not that bad. If there is some serious problem, they provide extra hotfixes, too.
It's (well, supposed to be) a turnkey-product. At least, the pay-version is.
Are you able to use something other than amavis and clam for scanning??
No.
We use a product called VAMS released by central command for spam and antivirus on our mail server currently. These guys are very generous with pricing when it comes to educational facilities in case anyone is looking.
You can still use it. Just not on the Zimbra-server.
I'm actually glad they don't have so many "use this instead of that" stuff. Just more stuff that could go wrong and that nobody QAs anyway.
Rainer
Rainer Duffner wrote:
For Zimbra, yes. But honestly: how on earth would they be able to guarantee that it's working correctly in any other meaningful way? Would you like to do support for your product that relies on a dozen or more external other products (that aren't maintained in most Enterprise Linux distributions anyway) when any of the vendors you support the product on can introduce a patch anyday that changes some stuff only you need in your software - and now you have customers all over the world phoning you why your P-O-S-software stopped working out- of-a-sudden.
I would have to agree here too. It can be a pain if you would have to maintain all the dependencies on a boxed system like this. There are plus and minuses to both. This is much like VMware's model for their Infrastructure software. (Yes, I know I'm comparing apples and oranges, but am using it as an example.) They are running on a RHEL base, which they maintain. You can't, or should I say you shouldn't, install, modify, or fiddle with any of your own packages, because they are supporting the actual OS, all the dependencies, as well as their own code.
This is a plus because the project X maintains the patches, updates, bugs, etc. I think you could argue this as a benefit, or a nuisance, but if you're not looking to have to maintain separate pieces of a system, then it would be a benefit. If you have the time and resources to maintain them all separately, then you have the choice of choosing something where you have more control.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe Zimbra tells you right up front that it should be a dedicated server for just Zimbra. It's purpose is exactly that, and you get what is advertised.
I guess this is why mailing lists exist, so everyone can give their opinions and experiences as advice. Ultimately, you choose the project that you can best maintain given your time and experience, and what best meets your needs. My two cents anyways.
Regards, Max
----- "Bo Lynch" blynch@ameliaschools.com wrote:
I would have thought that this was a small install:) We probably have at the most around 200-250. I was just guessing for growth. We too opt open source. Is zimbra a resource hog? Meaning do you think it would work with maybe a xeon quadcore with 4gb RAM?
RAM is by far the largest resource you can't possibly have enough of. For that number of users, I'd go with more if you can.
A quad core Xeon *should* work. One thing to remember is that your CPU usage will vary depending not on how many total clients you'll have but how many *simultaenous* clients you'll have accessing the system at a given time.
Another considering is the speed of your hard drives. 10000 RPM SATA/SAS or SCSI would be needed and you'll probably want RAID as well.
Check the Zimbra site (in the wiki and forums I believe) for more information on dimensioning Zimbra systems with many users. Most of the recommendations there are from real world scenarios.
Tim Nelson Systems/Network Support Rockbochs Inc. (218)727-4332 x105
You'll definitely want to look at a multi-server setup for that. Put your mail/web services on one box and database/LDAP on another. Also, for such a large installation you may even want to look at their commercially supported editions. Last time I checked (admittedly quite a while ago) the pricing wasn't too horrendous and I've heard good things about their support staff. We've always opted to go with the pure open source aka self-supported version but then again we're running installations with fewer than 300 users. I believe our largest installation to date is ~100 users or so.
I would have thought that this was a small install:)
Agree. If you need multi-servers for 300 hundred users something is just designed wrong. Unless you've got 300 intense power users.
Am 07.01.2009 um 22:24 schrieb Adam Tauno Williams:
You'll definitely want to look at a multi-server setup for that. Put your mail/web services on one box and database/LDAP on another. Also, for such a large installation you may even want to look at their commercially supported editions. Last time I checked (admittedly quite a while ago) the pricing wasn't too horrendous and I've heard good things about their support staff. We've always opted to go with the pure open source aka self- supported version but then again we're running installations with fewer than 300 users. I believe our largest installation to date is ~100 users or so.
I would have thought that this was a small install:)
Agree. If you need multi-servers for 300 hundred users something is just designed wrong. Unless you've got 300 intense power users.
Even then... 300 users should fit on a desktop-class machine (provided you've got enough RAM). Zimbra uses Java / Jetty and thus likes to have enough RAM. On a single server, I'd go with at least 8 GB of RAM. Go with 64bit Linux (AMD64). CentOS is not supported, but it seems to work nicely or now...
Rainer
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Rainer Duffner Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 5:32 PM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Email/GroupWare Suite
Am 07.01.2009 um 22:24 schrieb Adam Tauno Williams:
You'll definitely want to look at a multi-server setup for that. Put your mail/web services on one box and database/LDAP on
another. Also, for
such a large installation you may even want to look at their commercially supported editions. Last time I checked (admittedly quite a while ago) the pricing wasn't too horrendous and I've heard good things
about their
support staff. We've always opted to go with the pure open source aka self- supported version but then again we're running installations with fewer than 300 users. I believe our largest installation
to date is
~100 users or so.
I would have thought that this was a small install:)
Agree. If you need multi-servers for 300 hundred users something is just designed wrong. Unless you've got 300 intense power users.
Even then... 300 users should fit on a desktop-class machine (provided you've got enough RAM). Zimbra uses Java / Jetty and thus likes to have enough RAM. On a single server, I'd go with at least 8 GB of RAM. Go with 64bit Linux (AMD64). CentOS is not supported, but it seems to work nicely or now...
Rainer _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
My problem would be that a single machine is a single point of failure. We are looking at zimbra and using at least two machines utilizing GFS and our SAN so we can withstand a failure. We have around 75 users but I am not willing to have email down due to a single machine failing. (Btw, these would be virtual machines running on xenserver)
Seeing as you are in education, if you are looking to actually pay for licensing a product and are actually interested in Zimbra, take a look at their hosted model. It is only for educational institutions right now (not that I know if they will make the offering more widely available) and may fit the bill even more by not having to manage the hardware.
My biggest concern is the long term viability of zimbra with the possibility of MicroHoo or someone else picking up Yahoo in the future. I don't want to start something with that one, but for a business this is definitely a concern. I believe some of this has been addressed in their licensing language and there is always the the GPL version which would probably survive for at least a short while.
Andrew
Andrew Cotter wrote:
My problem would be that a single machine is a single point of failure. We are looking at zimbra and using at least two machines utilizing GFS and our SAN so we can withstand a failure.
Wouldn't drbl/heartbeat be less complicated for 2 machines?
On Wed, January 7, 2009 6:06 pm, Andrew Cotter wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Rainer Duffner Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 5:32 PM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Email/GroupWare Suite
Am 07.01.2009 um 22:24 schrieb Adam Tauno Williams:
You'll definitely want to look at a multi-server setup for that. Put your mail/web services on one box and database/LDAP on
another. Also, for
such a large installation you may even want to look at their commercially supported editions. Last time I checked (admittedly quite a while ago) the pricing wasn't too horrendous and I've heard good things
about their
support staff. We've always opted to go with the pure open source aka self- supported version but then again we're running installations with fewer than 300 users. I believe our largest installation
to date is
~100 users or so.
I would have thought that this was a small install:)
Agree. If you need multi-servers for 300 hundred users something is just designed wrong. Unless you've got 300 intense power users.
Even then... 300 users should fit on a desktop-class machine (provided you've got enough RAM). Zimbra uses Java / Jetty and thus likes to have enough RAM. On a single server, I'd go with at least 8 GB of RAM. Go with 64bit Linux (AMD64). CentOS is not supported, but it seems to work nicely or now...
Rainer _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
My problem would be that a single machine is a single point of failure. We are looking at zimbra and using at least two machines utilizing GFS and our SAN so we can withstand a failure. We have around 75 users but I am not willing to have email down due to a single machine failing. (Btw, these would be virtual machines running on xenserver)
Seeing as you are in education, if you are looking to actually pay for licensing a product and are actually interested in Zimbra, take a look at their hosted model. It is only for educational institutions right now (not that I know if they will make the offering more widely available) and may fit the bill even more by not having to manage the hardware.
My biggest concern is the long term viability of zimbra with the possibility of MicroHoo or someone else picking up Yahoo in the future. I don't want to start something with that one, but for a business this is definitely a concern. I believe some of this has been addressed in their licensing language and there is always the the GPL version which would probably survive for at least a short while.
Andrew
We would definitely be looking at a app for free in other words zimbra's open source release. We are planning on using existing hardware that we have. Currently we are running CentOS 5.2 with Pentium D 3.2 with 2gb ram and 2 500GB SATA drives in a RAID. The motherboard that we have will support a quadcore xeon if needed. Are setup now has no probs but we are only doing basic email and calendar within squirrelmail itself.
Bo Lynch
Cc$$$$$ Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message----- From: "Bo Lynch" blynch@ameliaschools.com
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 18:45:22 To: CentOS mailing listcentos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] Email/GroupWare Suite
On Wed, January 7, 2009 6:06 pm, Andrew Cotter wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Rainer Duffner Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 5:32 PM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Email/GroupWare Suite
Am 07.01.2009 um 22:24 schrieb Adam Tauno Williams:
You'll definitely want to look at a multi-server setup for that. Put your mail/web services on one box and database/LDAP on
another. Also, for
such a large installation you may even want to look at their commercially supported editions. Last time I checked (admittedly quite a while ago) the pricing wasn't too horrendous and I've heard good things
about their
support staff. We've always opted to go with the pure open source aka self- supported version but then again we're running installations with fewer than 300 users. I believe our largest installation
to date is
~100 users or so.
I would have thought that this was a small install:)
Agree. If you need multi-servers for 300 hundred users something is just designed wrong. Unless you've got 300 intense power users.
Even then... 300 users should fit on a desktop-class machine (provided you've got enough RAM). Zimbra uses Java / Jetty and thus likes to have enough RAM. On a single server, I'd go with at least 8 GB of RAM. Go with 64bit Linux (AMD64). CentOS is not supported, but it seems to work nicely or now...
Rainer _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
My problem would be that a single machine is a single point of failure. We are looking at zimbra and using at least two machines utilizing GFS and our SAN so we can withstand a failure. We have around 75 users but I am not willing to have email down due to a single machine failing. (Btw, these would be virtual machines running on xenserver)
Seeing as you are in education, if you are looking to actually pay for licensing a product and are actually interested in Zimbra, take a look at their hosted model. It is only for educational institutions right now (not that I know if they will make the offering more widely available) and may fit the bill even more by not having to manage the hardware.
My biggest concern is the long term viability of zimbra with the possibility of MicroHoo or someone else picking up Yahoo in the future. I don't want to start something with that one, but for a business this is definitely a concern. I believe some of this has been addressed in their licensing language and there is always the the GPL version which would probably survive for at least a short while.
Andrew
We would definitely be looking at a app for free in other words zimbra's open source release. We are planning on using existing hardware that we have. Currently we are running CentOS 5.2 with Pentium D 3.2 with 2gb ram and 2 500GB SATA drives in a RAID. The motherboard that we have will support a quadcore xeon if needed. Are setup now has no probs but we are only doing basic email and calendar within squirrelmail itself.
Bo Lynch
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
russ@vshift.com wrote:
Cc$$$$$ Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
Huh??? and why did you send this, quoting 200 something lines of previous peoples quotes without a clue what you're referring to??
folks, your cellphones make LOUSY email list communications device. please stick with sending your one-liners to twitter.
-
Adam Tauno Williams -
Agile Aspect -
Andrew Cotter -
Bill Campbell -
Bo Lynch -
Craig White -
John R Pierce -
Lanny Marcus -
Les Mikesell -
Max Hetrick -
Rainer Duffner -
russ＠vshift.com -
Scott Silva -
Tim Nelson