You can use the perfmons at the bottom of this: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851495.aspx
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 8:30 AM, McCready, Robert <rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com>wrote: > Another quick question. Is there any way to see how close we are to the > 32k hard limit today? > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Alex Fontana [mailto:afontana...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Friday, March 20, 2009 1:05 AM > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* Re: Named Property Limit > > > > Seems this turned into a b-ch fest rather than answering your original > question...;-) While I agree this is a ridiculous characteristic in the > design and one that opens us up for DoS attacks (eventually), it is what it > is and we need to figure out how to work around it. You have a few options; > increase the limit, move users off, or find out what is causing it and stop > it. > > My first suggestion is to take inventory of where your databases are as far > as named props are concerned, you need to expose some IS counters to see > this info, but it'll give you an understanding on whether it's widespread or > concentrated on a set of databases (or users). Next start monitoring your > event logs. An event ID is logged by default each time a new named prop is > added (event id 9873 I believe) and when the quota's been reached (9666, 7, > 8, 9). This can help you track down the culprit. Note, the initial limit > reached is the default quota...not the limit. My understanding is that when > the hard limit (32k) is reached the database will dismount and you will have > to restore from backup and move users off. > > In my situation I found that less than a dozen users were creating hundreds > of named props daily for weeks. This was the result of an open source imap > client called offlineIMAP. This client is used to bidirectionally synch > messages via IMAP. It does this by creating a unique X-header for EVERY > message that comes in, as opposed to a single X-header with a specific > value. After finding this out I reached out to the users, and being the > ridiculously intelligent (and curious) crew they are they crafted a patch > for offlineIMAP (http://software.complete.org/software/issues/show/114). > > Hope this helps. > -alex > > > > > > > ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja ~
