Re: Network PST confusion
From: Roady [MVP] (newsgroups_DELETE__at__DELETE_sparnaaij_NO_._SPAM_net)
Date: 05/04/04
- Next message: wfw: "Re: Where is follow flag up date?"
- Previous message: Steve Aschettino: "Re: How to Disable Outlook pst files in Outlook 2000"
- In reply to: spooky: "Re: Network PST confusion"
- Next in thread: Roady [MVP]: "Re: Network PST confusion"
- Reply: Roady [MVP]: "Re: Network PST confusion"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 19:51:29 +0200
All other solutions you suggested are also not supported. I don't see how
Exchange 2005 would help here either; it's just the mailserver. One thing
that could help is a complete redesign of the pst-filestructure. Note that
this has already been the case for Outlook 2003 and UNICODE support and a
practically unlimited growth of the file.
A real solution would be to upgrade to Exchange Enterprise Edition. With EEE
you can go beyond the 16GB database storage limit which the Standard edition
has. Since you are already thinking about storing the pst-files on the
network this won't cost you anymore harddisk space. In fact it will cost you
less storage space as Exchange stored mail a lot more optimized than a
pst-file does.
Another real solution would be to have people to clean up their mailboxes
and store attachments outside of their mailboxes and reduce the size of
their mailbox. A guide on how that can be achieved can be found here;
http://www.sparnaaij.net/howto/cleanmailbox.htm
-- Roady [MVP] www.sparnaaij.net Microsoft Office and Microsoft Office related News Also Outlook FAQ, How To's, Downloads and more... Tips of the month: -Setting Permissions on a Mailbox -Create an Office XP CD slipstreamed with Service Pack 3 ----- "spooky" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:0A0380A0-7FFC-491F-8AEE-3084F8AEEFA2@microsoft.com... > Thanks Roady. > > The CD idea is interesting although not feasible here, therefore what would you (or others reading this) recommend in terms of roaming users and access to archived mail? There are no legal requirements which need to be fulfilled, it's purely for users to access mail which they *manually* moved from their inbox to a PST to reduce their mailbox limit. All PCs are workstations and users sit at different workstations every now and again. > > Is a 3rd party solution such as near-line storage the *only* solution or am I missing something? Or should I wait for Exchange 2005? ;-) Personally I'd be all for implementing a 3rd party solution if that is indeed the only way to access older mail stored in archives but I still need to hear from someone that there is no other way. > > I know there is a terminal server approach but that's also gonna cost... > > > > ----- Roady [MVP] wrote: ----- > > It was and still is unsupported to my knowledge. The second article you > stated could be up for revision (I'll have that checked for you). Thanks for > pointing it out. > > Storing pst-files on (fast) networkshares works in most cases without any > problems except for poor performance and the fact that connections could get > lost and could cause corruption of the file. In this case use scanpst.exe or > restore from back-up. > > I do see it as a possibility but I would certainly not call it "recomended > practise" as it is unsupported. > > I would recommend it if the following is true; > -It is a closed archive and you have a back-up on CD/DVD or any other medium > easily available to the end user > -It is an open archive and you make daily back-ups of the file and people > don't mind loosing a day of email in case you need to restore from back-up. > > In the first case the user could also travel with his/her CD/DVD and place > local copies of it on the workstation he/she works on at that time (we do > that here as well). Just in case we made a copy of the CD/DVD which the user > can store in a safe place just in case the original gets damaged by the > traveling. > > -- > Roady [MVP] www.sparnaaij.net > Microsoft Office and Microsoft Office related News > Also Outlook FAQ, How To's, Downloads and more... > > Tips of the month: > -Setting Permissions on a Mailbox > -Create an Office XP CD slipstreamed with Service Pack 3 > > ----- > "spooky" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:EBD50940-D4AA-477A-9D99-000D72E57338@microsoft.com... > > ***apologies for the cross post*** > >> All, > >> I'm a bit confused! > >> This article (http://support.microsoft.com/?id=297019) says Networked PSTs > are bad. > > Yet another by MS (http://www.microsoft.com/office/ork/xp/four/outd05.htm) > supports the use of Network PSTs. > >> If PSTs are no longer supported on network stroage, what is the > recommended strategy nowadays for users to have access to mail in their > personal archive? I know that by using some sort of 'near-line' storage > 3rd party product I can 'automatically' archive mail based on age or size > but these solutions are expensive. > >> This is why in the past network stored PSTs were perfect for giving users > access to thier archive, no matter where they sat. OWA is great for > checking new mail but once again there is no access to a users' PST archive. > >> If anyone knows what the recommended approach is, without shelling out for > 3rd party products, please enlighten me! > >>
- Next message: wfw: "Re: Where is follow flag up date?"
- Previous message: Steve Aschettino: "Re: How to Disable Outlook pst files in Outlook 2000"
- In reply to: spooky: "Re: Network PST confusion"
- Next in thread: Roady [MVP]: "Re: Network PST confusion"
- Reply: Roady [MVP]: "Re: Network PST confusion"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
