Re: Design - Exchange Organization
- From: "Leif Pedersen [MVP]" <Leif.pedersenNO-SPAM@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2006 18:18:20 +0100
Hi,
You direct the temporary defragmentation file to another disk using the /t
switch to eseutil. - see
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;192185
As Mark wrote look for events 1221. This event will tell you how much space
can be gained by an offline defrag - and only run this is you are very low
on diskspace.
Leif
"Dev" <devendrait@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1164966225.961820.186560@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi Marks, Thanks for your assistance. One thing more I want to clarify
that while doing offline defragmentation its making temporary file ic
c: which I do not want. How I could change this location. Second thing
after defragmentation also size is showing same. I have tested offline
defragmentation on 10GB of store.
Mark Arnold [MVP] wrote:
On 30 Nov 2006 03:25:53 -0800, "Dev" <devendrait@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Mark, I am sorry that by mistake I mentioned your name in my reply.
But I am happy to see your response. I have one question Even I am
moving the mailboxes its showing the same space and after moving all
mailbox its showing the same size like previous store is showing. Even
I told user to delete old mails then also the store size is same. I
discussed with some administrator and the suggested me for the offline
defragmentation. What you will suggest for this issue.
The store size will never decrease until you do an offline defrag. You
shouldn't need to do an offline defrag though because the users will
just re-fill the store before it gets any bigger.
Just make sure that you are getting event id 1221 messages in the
early hours. If you have very restricted space on the physical disk
then you need to think about getting more disk space. If you are
convinced that your users won't be growing the store then there might
be a case for the offline defrag.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Design - Exchange Organization
- From: Dev
- Re: Design - Exchange Organization
- References:
- Design - Exchange Organization
- From: Fazal
- Re: Design - Exchange Organization
- From: Mark Arnold [MVP]
- Re: Design - Exchange Organization
- From: Dev
- Re: Design - Exchange Organization
- From: Mark Arnold [MVP]
- Re: Design - Exchange Organization
- From: Dev
- Re: Design - Exchange Organization
- From: Mark Arnold [MVP]
- Re: Design - Exchange Organization
- From: Dev
- Design - Exchange Organization
- Prev by Date: Re: Exchange 2003 Transaction Log Performance
- Next by Date: Re: ISA Server 2006 and Exchange 2003/2007 on same machine
- Previous by thread: Re: Design - Exchange Organization
- Next by thread: Re: Design - Exchange Organization
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading