Thanks for the insight/understanding. I'll give perfmon a shot, and check slipstick for some possible solutions.
One thing ... if this started happening right after we switched to the SAN, then I must conclude that SAN technology may not be able handle large mailbox enumerations, etc ... agreed? But a SAN is supposed to outperform a SCSI Raid, right? Also, if the user has no emails in his inbox folder (they're all in another folder in the mailbox) ... that's not going to make a difference, right? ... didn't think so. Thanks again ... Jim -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 7:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs I'm betting these users have tons of folders or, just as bad, a small number of folders with lots of messages in them. When a user accesses the root of his mailbox the folders in the root level are enumerated by the server and passed back to the client. As each folder is accessed (either by clicking on it, by a rule or by dragging a message to it) the contents of that folder are enumerated by the server and passed back to the client. This... takes... time... for... lots... of... messages... or... folders. The user sees a definite slowdown and in OutlookXP will get the popup message you described (Outlook's communication with the server is single-threaded). Try this experiment if you can find the chance to do it. Have the user reboot his workstation and start Outlook. Have perfmon running against the Exchange server watching physical memory, store usage of memory, cpu and store use of cpu. Watch them spike up and keep ramping up. There's your answer. Solution: dig through the junk and get rid of the crap (Mike, let's meet for lunch on 4/4/97). Come up with a logical and efficient folder hierarchy that reflects the users' usage of those folders. Anything not accessed in over six months (arbitrary number) goes to a PST (and backed up, just in case). Although Exchange is generally pretty good about maintaining large amounts of objects and data the contents of the mailbox itself are pretty much left up to the user to manage. That is to say that Exchange owns the mailbox, but not the contents of the mailbox (in the sense of managing it). This is usually not a problem, but then again the usual user doesn't have 65,000 objects in his mailbox, let alone 200,000. I understand there are some third-party add-ons for Outlook that help with managing a large amount of information offering indexing, management and archival functions; that's what's needed here. Exchange is doing what it is supposed to do and OL isn't intelligent enough to serve as a front-end to a very large store of objects. Take a look at www.slipstick.com. ----- Original Message ----- From: "missy koslosky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 6:41 PM Subject: Re: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs > This is more a case of sh!t happens than anything else... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jim Brady" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 5:32 PM > Subject: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs > > > Running Exch55, Sp4, NT4, Sp5 with IS located on SAN Shark (Compaq Fiber > Card). Running TrendServerProtect and TrendScanMail. A certain user > is getting a lot of latency/delays (requesting data from Microsoft > Exchange dialog box, etc) when accessing his mailbox in Outlook (XP). > Not a network issue, as he's tried this from multiple PC's, laptops > (wireless), etc . same errors periodically. Plenty of free space on the > IS/LOG drives. No errors in the event logs. He wasn't having these > problems before we switched to the SAN (Compaq RAID5 before). One > caveat . this user has a 240MB mailbox with 150,000 - 200,000 messages > in it . so many, it's only reading as 0 messages. > > One other user (out of 250 on the server) has complained also. This > user has a 3.5GB mailbox, but only 65,000 messages in it. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > > Jim > > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
