It's called Corporate America -- I work for a company that is new to IT in relation to the company history, and is still having a difficult time paying for stuff. You wouldn't believe half the stories I could tell, I'm sure. :)
> -----Original Message----- > From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 10:42 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Outlook appointments on Exchange > > > Financial constraints???? How much does a fsckin HDD cost these days? > > Your argument is weak! > > Don Ely - NMBOTWBAS and then some > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 2:59 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Outlook appointments on Exchange > > > That's quite a leap, to say that offline maintenance is > causing 2 or 3 mailboxes out of 1200 to be unable to respond > to specific meeting requests, even though it's been running > for years without a single problem. Might want to reconsider > your logic on that one -- there's not a shred of evidence > that suggests it's a "direct result." :) > > The main reason we do offline defragging every 6 months is > because our store size is NOT constant, not by a long > stretch. Our organization has specific needs and usage > trends that cause a great deal of unallocated space to pile > up from time to time. Historically we've been unable to > extend the physical space on the servers due to financial > restraints, so we've been forced to make do with the limited > space by compacting the database from time to time. > Thankfully, this paradigm is changing around here so > hopefully we can get some new space and forget about it > altogether. I was really more interested in hearing the > other arguments just to satisfy my own curiosity. Thanks for > everyone's response! > > Jon > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 2:46 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Outlook appointments on Exchange > > > > > > Seeing as the problem you're experiencing is most likely the direct > > result of one of your offline database management > practices, you might > > want to change your thinking on it. > > > > The only time I've ever seen a good reason to do them is > following a > > large scale change on a server - like migrating 30GB of > user data off > > it. > > > > Exchange does a phenominal job of self-managing the > database. Better > > than you can do, with few exceptions. > > > > Take the compacting process - you do it every 6 months (IIRC). Why? > > I'd bet that the store hits a relatively constant size at > the end of > > that 6 month period, and all things considered, the amount of white > > space stays relatively consistent. So, in a nutshell, you're doing > > something that has no upside, yet has the very real possibility of > > causing damage. > > > > Roger > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE > > Sr. Systems Administrator > > Peregrine Systems > > Atlanta, GA > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 1:29 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Outlook appointments on Exchange > > > > > > > > > I'm interested in hearing some sound arguments on why offline > > > maintenance should *not* be performed ... I've heard/read quite a > > > few people cringing > > > about it, but can never back it up. I've been doing it for > > > years without a > > > hitch; I think as long as the proper precautions are taken > > and proper > > > trending and planning is performed instead of just defragging > > > willy-nilly, it's a pretty safe thing to do. I'm interested in > > > hearing the other side, > > > though ... anyone? > > > Jon > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 12:42 PM > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > Subject: RE: Outlook appointments on Exchange > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd bet the same people who say not to do exactly what you are > > > > doing are VERY comfortable with esetuil and isinteg. > > > > > > > > That's precisely why they say *not* to do it. > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE > > > > Sr. Systems Administrator > > > > Peregrine Systems > > > > Atlanta, GA > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > 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] > _________________________________________________________________ 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]
