Re: Exchange/Outlook 2003 mailbox sizes - best practises
- From: "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" <lanwench@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:13:08 -0400
jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi All,
I have a problem with a customer.
SBS2003 R2, just upgraded from and SBS2000.
About 20 users.
Exchange maibox store is almost at 16GB at the moment, hence the
upgrade to SBS 2003.
Problem:
One user, the MD, has an individual mailbox which is almost 7GB on
it's own !
Ah. Well, everyone needs quotas in Standard edition - unless they have
server-side archive software.
He also opens up an archive.pst file across the LAN which is around
4GB in size.
This is not supported. See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/297019.
Also see
http://www.exchangefaq.org/faq/Exchange-5.5/Why-PST-=-BAD-/q/Why-PST-=-BAD/qid/1209
PST files should be shunned entirely. You can't manage the data in them. If
the data is important enough to keep, it belongs on the server.
Needless to say he finds that he has a very poorly performing Outlook
experience.
Plus others say that the network grinds to a halt on the days that he
is in the office.
He also finds working remotely over a VPN a very slow painful
experience.
How did he get here ?
That's pretty obvious! :)
Well he stores practically everything that he does into his mailbox
rather than storing it in folders on the server.
Exchange is not a file server. I can't find you any documentation on that
because I don't know of any. We all just know this because we know it. I
also don't know of any that states that Exchange is not a toaster-oven, for
similar reasons.
basically he finds it a lot easier as he say sthat verything is always
with him when he's out of the office.
Sure.
I know it's an education issue but he just won't listen.
Write up your profesional opinion and print it out and make him sign it.
When something crashes you can show it to him, quietly. and you're blamed
for iut, you can whip it out.
He has thousands and thousands of subfolders in his mailbox.
Hell, at least he makes subfolders.
Don't let users create subfolders under built-in folders. Create a top-level
folder like "_User's Saved Items" and have all subfolders created there. If
you ever want to use mailbox management (managed folders in E2008) on the
inbox, sent items, whatnot, it will act on all subfolders as well. And even
right now, it's a lot easier to do something with a custom parent folder
than with subfolders that you'd have to drag/move individually.
What I'm after is any good links to any reference or best practices
information that I can wave at him to try and make him understand that
he's killing the LAN and server performance.
Well, he's *seeing* the results right now, isn't he? And so are his staff.
The size of the mailbox is an issue only because you use Standard. In
Enterprise, you could grow the store pretty much as large as you want, as
long as you have the hardware to support it (and the backup media...and can
deal with the long backup and restore times). In Enterprise you could put
his mailbox into its own storage group, too.
The number of items in any given folder is actually a bigger issue than the
size of the mailbox. See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/905803 for more
info.
Does anyone know of any good reference material or have any comments/
advice on this.
Jim.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: How to Block Port 25 from Clients?
- Next by Date: Re: Trend Micro WFBS
- Previous by thread: Re: Exchange/Outlook 2003 mailbox sizes - best practises
- Next by thread: Re: Exchange/Outlook 2003 mailbox sizes - best practises
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
