I think you need to worry about your LDAP performance first. That's crappy
LDAP response time. How many DCs do you have and why are they so busy?
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: Travis Krampy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 3:12 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Exchange performance
Thanks! I am going to take Simon's advise and just move mailboxes into
new
mailstores. I am also going to utilize Exchange Ent and maximize the SG's
As for performance, i have run the troubleshooting tool...
Here is what i found (Note that this was run on the weekend and not during
the weekday):
Performance issue found on logical disk containing database files
Database disk: The maximum value for '\LogicalDisk(J:)\Avg. Disk sec/Read'
should be less than 0.05 (50 ms). The measured value is 0.054 (54 ms).
Maximum 'MSExchangeDSAccess Domain
Controllers(Domaincontroller.domain.com)\LDAP Read Time' is beyond the
warning threshold of 100 ms. The measured value is 258 ms. The rate of
reads
to this domain controller is 1 calls per second, indicating the active
directory server is used infrequently. Rates below 0.5 are considered low.
Maximum 'MSExchangeDSAccess Domain
Controllers(Domaincontroller.domain.com)\LDAP Search Time' is beyond the
warning threshold of 100 ms. The measured value is 219 ms. The rate of
searches to this domain controller is 1 calls per second, indicating the
active directory server is used infrequently. Rates below 0.5 are
considered
low.
Active RPC User Activity
Since the RPC operations per second per user is greater than 0.15, the
users
are considered as 'moderately active'. The measured RPC operations per
second/per user rate is 0.217.
The tool also gave me a recommendation to:
If the users accessing the Exchange server are highly active, and you are
unable to reduce the load on your server, and your server is exhibiting
bottlenecks, you should consider moving some users to another server.
Looks like I have some more digging...
I never had to deal with RPC latiency issues, can anyone point me to a
direction to start looking? Obviously i need to take care of the disk
bottleneck, but could the disk bottleneck be an indication that the SAN
isnt
configured properly for Exchange?
I dont deal much with SANs, only direct attached storage for exchange...
Thanks
Travis
"Troy Meyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I agree with Simon (as will most of the other Exch admins here) that if
you
can just move the mailboxes to a different mailstore, its not worth doing
the offline defrag. You get essentially the same result when you are able
to delete the original mailstore.
Your speed symptoms sound strange, is it with everyone, or just select
users? I would look at mailboxes to make sure you don't have users with
tons of data and a million things in the inbox. If you can help it, keep
mailbox sizes under 2gb and less than 5000 items in a single folder (IE
move
extra items to a subfolder). If you allow excess (as we do) just let
users
know its their call and they need to know performance will suffer. Also,
how are your users connecting? Is everyone local MAPI? If you have
humongous mailboxes, cached mode should help improve performance a bit.
Hope that helps
Troy
-----Original Message-----
From: Simon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 9:28 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange performance
Have you run the Exchange Troubleshooting tool on the server?
How do you know you will gain 50% of the space on an offline defrag?
You are prepared for the downtime? 100gb stores, that is between 4 days
and
24 hours total downtime (the rough rule of thumb is 1 - 4gb per hour for
an
offline defrag).
As you are running Enterprise edition and have not maximised out the
number
of storage groups, I wouldn't even be considering an offline defrag.
Create
some new databases and move the mailboxes, then drop the original store.
I will leave it to others to post on the SAN performance issues.
However, I will say that I have seen performance gains by REMOVING RAM. I
get funny looks when I do that, but I have removed 2gb from 4gb machines
and
seen performance gains in the past.
Simon.
--
Simon Butler
MVP: Exchange, MCSE
Amset IT Solutions Ltd.
e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
w: www.amset.co.uk
w: www.amset.info
Need cheap certificates for Exchange, compatible with Windows Mobile 5.0?
http://CertificatesForExchange.com/ for certificates from just $23.99.
Need a domain for your certificate? http://DomainsForExchange.net/
-----Original Message-----
From: Travis Krampy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 01 November 2008 16:13
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Exchange performance
Hi All,
I have been assigned to look at some performance issues on an exchange
server.
Exchange 2003 Ent, SP2, Windows 2003 SP2
4Gb RAM, 1 dual core processor, 2-36Gb hard drives (OS) RAID1, 2-72Gb Hard
drives (Pagefies, SMTP) RAID1
Databases and Tranaction logs on SAN
8 different Databases, 2 Storage Groups (4 databases in each storage
group)
8-RAID5 LUNS (200Gb each) all on the same set of spindels, one for each
DB,
and 2 RAID1 LUNS for the transaction logs (200Gb each, all on the same
spindels)
The exchange server is connected to the san using Fiber Channel
The performance issues that are being experienced are mostly Outlook
issues
Changing from Inbox to Calendar is about a 10 second pause
sometimes clicking on a message will take about 5 seconds to display
properly in the reading pane
moving from folders takes a few seconds for outlook to respond
I am in the process of scheduleing some defrags on the databases. Each
database is either at or nearing the 100Gb mark. I have calculated that I
can get the databases down to about 50% or less.
I am not confident that doing these defrags will imporve performance.
Given all of this information, what else can I do or look at to improve
performance?
Could my SAN be a part of the performance problem that the users are
experiencing?
How could I find out if my SAN is part of the problem?
Thanks
Travis
~ 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 ~
