Easily done:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb331954(EXCHG.80).aspx

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange


-----Original Message-----
From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 9:54 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Small Fopah

Michael,

Are those documented somewhere (I believe you - I've always asked for
those as something other than a services deliverable, and never got
them).

--James


On 10/9/08, Michael B. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Microsoft guidance says that if you are doing streaming backups, you
should
> target 35 GB per store as an opti-max value, never exceeding 50 GB.
>
> If you are doing VSS backups, never exceed 100 GB.
>
> If you are doing continuous replication backups (that is, backing up the
> passive copy), never exceed 200 GB.
>
> These are recommendations, not "we won't support you if you exceed these
> values". The right answer for a given company for the maximum size of a
> store is: whatever you can backup and restore within your SLA.
>
> MSFT recommends that you ignore SIS when planning for the size of your
> mailbox stores.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
> My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
> Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michelle Weaver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 1:05 AM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Small Fopah
>
> One large store in Exchange 2003 isn't a good thing. I know in Exchange
> 2000, one giant store worked fine, but in 2003, it changed. We had a
> gigantic store, 163 GB (or some ridiculous number like that). We never
could
> have recovered it, and it wasn't backing up properly because one backup
> wouldn't be finished when the next one wanted to start. No matter how we
> tried to tweak the timing, it never seemed to work. Log files never
purged,
> hard drives filled up, Exchange went offline. It was ugliness all around.
>
> We broke the one store into 4 information stores with several databases in
> each one, trying to keep the database files smaller than 30 GB. I can't
> remember where I found that "magic number", very well could have been some
> random thing I dreamed up, but we didn't have problems with Exchange going
> offline after that.
>
> We had no mailbox quotas and no limit to attachments either. A silly,
silly
> way to run Exchange, but the very importants didn't seem to care much for
> the finer points of the technology. They just wanted complete freedom. I
> spent a month moving mailboxes into the other stores, after hours, then
ran
> an offline defrag on the emptied store to get the space back. Every month
> I'd send notes to people with extremely large mailboxes (more than 500
MB).
> The subject line read "Piggy mailboxes", and I included instructions for
> cleaning up mailboxes. It offended many customers, but it also shamed them
> into cleaning out the garbage.
>
> Remember, if the size of the database is 100 GB prior to a big purge
effort
> and the customers delete 50 GB of crap, the size of the database remains
100
> GB, but the store still has 50 GB to grow before it will get bigger than
the
> 100 GB it was before the cleanup. An offline defrag is required to get the
> empty space back, but the store won't grow again until the amount of data
> grows back to the original size, as if that empty 50 GB of data is just a
> placeholder, waiting to be filled.
>
> Either way, you didn't commit a faux pas. The way you're running it, with
> the exception of the no quota thing, is considered best practice, not one
> large store.
>
>
>
> Michelle Weaver
> Systems Administrator, Materials Research Institute
> Penn State University
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wed 10/8/2008 8:26 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: Small Fopah
>
> Oh magic genies of Exchange, (Rubbing furiously)
>
>
>
> Well I believe about a year ago I made a Exchange Fopah with my Stores.
> Exch 2003 Sp2, Enterprise
>
>
>
> The thinking was that data in the main Store is growing quite large and
> the recovery time with our current backup tape drive would have taken 12
> to 14 hours..So Veritas estimated.. verified with a tech on the
> line..yadda yadda..
>
>
>
> Mgmt was not happy with that wanted it to be lower without spending
> money and wanted the stores broken up by Groups..  Admin Staff, Finance,
> Sales, etc..
>
> The desire was to be able to recover someone's folder or data more
> quickly than having to do an entire IS recovery of all mailboxes and
> just recover the depts. Store data..
>
>
>
> So I broke it up knowing that SIS would be lost if Email went across
> stores.. It was brought up to mgmt but they said the majority of email
> was dept localized.  I didn't think so and did not fight hard enough,
> but.. Now fast forward a year and we are sitting with 5 stores but oh
> look they all have grown at about the same rate because they send email
> to everyone regardless so I now make a copy 5 times for every email and
> attachment..
>
> Did I mention that they refused to set store limits and mandated 20gig
> file transfers allowed via SMTP..Oh I lost that one hard... CEO had to
> be able to send videos to his other buddies and the dept heads as well..
>
>
>
> So now the question...I am 99.9999% sure that moving all of the
> mailboxes back into the same store will result in one store being the
> size of the sum of all 5 stores combined...  Am I right there??
>
>
>
> Any suggestions now that they are separated and essentially is just
> taking up more space...
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja                ~
>
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja                ~
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja                ~


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja                ~

Reply via email to