Re: OL2k3+Ex2k3, Shared mailbox, custom form, imported contact=slo

From: Peter (peterguy)
Date: 12/29/04 

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 16:11:24 -0800

Oh my.

I was following along pretty well, nodding my head and muttering "uh-huh" at each step, but when you starting chucking KB numbers around like a rookie in spring training, I ran for cover. ;-)

Glad you figured out what is causing your headache, hope you find the software equivalent of Advil soon. I hope that isn't waiting for SP2, either.

-Peter

"Lou Zher" <LouZher@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:F68ED98E-7516-4C5A-BD6D-14CA9B89CA54@microsoft.com...
> Thanks Peter, but that's not it.
>
> I played around with owner create via import vs. sharer create via import
> and that doesn't seem to matter. In other words, the owner of the item
> doesn't seem to matter, but the owner of the mailbox does. I agree that it
> does sound like a permissions issue except that I can create a mailbox with
> just two items in it, one fast and one slow, so that doesn't match up with
> the permissions theory since permissions are set at the folder level.
>
> Your idea of using VBA was a good idea. I thought of it too. Unfortunately,
> the VBA created contacts that end up acting like imported ones. I would just
> have someone enter them in manually, but there are just too many contacts to
> make that practical.
>
> I started thinking that it was a caching issue and started chasing that
> rabbit and found out that additional mailboxes aren't cached at all. The next
> logical step was to turn off cached exchange mode to see if the problem
> happens on the owner's mailbox. It does.
>
> So, now the problem is
> Cached Exchange Mode=off + custom form + imported contact = slow
>
> Oh yeah, I should also mention that my 3-5 seconds for open was just a rough
> estimate. I didn't time it until today. Actual time: 9-12 seconds! Wow. I
> discounted my original estimate because I'm impatient and tend to exaggerate
> response time. Anyway, it's really bad.
>
> Here's another interesting clue:
> After about ten tests on opening the slow and the fast contact, I
> consistently see the fast contact only causing four packets to be sent and
> received (8 total), however, the slow contacts Tx/Rx around 100 packets each
> way (~200 total). Keep in mind, neither one is cached and both contacts are
> small as far as item size.
>
> And finally, the biggest clue: I'd replicated this issue across four
> machines already, so it didn't appear to be machine specific, but, just
> because I've got nothing better to do ;) I tried it on four other machines in
> our lab and amazingly enough they don't experience the problem. They're on
> the same network and all that. There didn't appear to be any obvious
> difference between these machines other than they were a little dusty from
> going unloved for about four months... ah ha! They've all gone quite a while
> without updates. After some experimenting, I found that all the Windows
> updates are okay and don't affect anything, but Office SP1 does, which sucks
> because you can't uninstall it (without removing all of Office and
> reinstalling it). I started with a working 'goes fast all the time' machine,
> did nothing but install Office SP1 and reconnected and it started doing the
> fast/slow business.
>
> I was hoping I could figure out which specific part of Office 2003 SP1 did
> this, but I could no longer download the individual hotfixes that comprised
> it. I am suspicous of KBs 833856, 838020, and 834716, but it could also be a
> part that no hotfix was ever available for. The whole thing stinks of
> Q331320, but I compared two otherwise identical (except for SP1) lab
> machines' rpcrt4.dll and both show 5.1.2600.1361.
>
> So Office 2003 SP1 seems to be the culprit, but I should still be able to
> get around the problem if I can find a way to create items in exactly the
> same way Outlook does, but so far this hasn't worked out. I'm almost
> desperate enough to try something like making a keyboard-stuffing script that
> plays against Outlook to create these contacts, but I'll first tinker around
> with the VBA code some more.
>
> Thanks again Peter for your ideas.
> -LZ