Re: Exchange transactions - I'm confused!
- From: "Mark (News)" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 22 Dec 2005 09:39:20 -0800
No one interested? :(
Well, I did some more testing - 3 tests. On a system with about 80,000
used jet pages, with very very low load (i.e. no users at all), there
were no bad page links when the log files were blown away. When the
usage was increased to low usage (10 low use users) there were 16 bad
page links and when it was increased to high usage, there were 247.
Let's convert this to a live scenario: a company with a few hundered to
few thousand users per database loses its transaction logs at the end
of the day. The only solution is to repair (unless they are happy to
lose a whole day's email) which can cause an unpredictable amount of
lost data. IMHO, this is not good for a system that is supposed to be
good at recovering from failures especially as a restore won't dig you
out of a hole in this case (though some may argue that I have
unrealistically high expectations here).
How to mitigate the risk? Well, I'd like to see the dirty pages flushed
before the stores are suddenly dismounted. There must be a good reason
why it doesn't but I can't figure out what it is. (Any ideas?)
Otherwise, back up the logs regularly throughout the day I guess.
Any thoughts?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Exchange transactions - I'm confused!
- From: Andy David
- Re: Exchange transactions - I'm confused!
- References:
- Exchange transactions - I'm confused!
- From: Mark (News)
- Exchange transactions - I'm confused!
- Prev by Date: SMTP Queue performance??
- Next by Date: Re: IMF update breaks IMF?
- Previous by thread: Exchange transactions - I'm confused!
- Next by thread: Re: Exchange transactions - I'm confused!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|