Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Just looking for a direction to go. There are several HA/load-balancing packages for Ubuntu 10.04 and I'm not sure which one to use. Here is my scenario:

Using Postfix for smtp, dovecot for pop/imap.

Two servers:

In normal operation I want one server to respond to smtp and the other to pop/imap.

If any server fails I want the other to respond to both smtp and pop/imap.


Looking for one that is the easiest to set up while still allowing different routing depending on incoming port.


I have file replication already set up, I'm using gluster. This will replicate the email files between servers.

MySQL is a separate server that we are already using for our production postfix/dovecot authentication. WWW is also a separate server we're using for our webmail/postfixadmin service, using the aforementioned MySQL server.

share|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

You can use keepalived for high availability. You can define two VIPs: one for each service smtp and pop/imap. One node can be configured as master for smtp and the other can be configured as master for pop/imap. When any node fails, boths VIPs are assigned to the remaining node.

Also, keepalived supports several load balancing algorithms and can be configured with failover and check scripts.

share|improve this answer
I've decided to use corosync/pacemaker for HA and keep all the services as a fail over group. Decided not to go with replication but rather mounting an nfs share from our (windows) file server. I have a question posted on that if you want to take a look at it.… – peg_leg Jan 27 '12 at 21:43

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.