I tell my users 2k, 'cause they end up at 5k. If I told them 5k, they would end up at 10k :)
________________________________ From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 10:16 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance I shoot for under 5K. From: Neil Hobson [mailto:nhob...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 8:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance You made me go and look, didn't you? J I remember Ross Smith talking about this at TechEd EMEA and using the 20k figure. I wasn't 100% correct. Turns out that it's the Inbox and Sent Items at 20k, but the Contacts and Calendar are still at 5k. Having said this, keeping everything below 5k is always going to be better. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc535025.aspx From: KevinM [mailto:kev...@wlkmmas.org] Sent: 23 March 2009 14:51 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance Do you mean total items in all folders or per folder? It is so hard to get a firm answer on Items per folder. The last great written thing by Nicole I think was no more than 1,000 items per folder. I know it has changed since then. Last I had heard was 10k with the latest stuff. Has Matt or Nicole posting something different to the Exchange blog recently? ~Kevinm WLKMMAS My life http://www.hedonists.ca <http://www.hedonists.ca/> From: Neil Hobson [mailto:nhob...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 7:36 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance It's all about the number of items in the core folders, like Inbox, Sent Items, Calendar, etc, and also restricted views. In Exchange 2003, the recommendation was to keep the number of items in these folders < 5,000. In Exchange 2007, the recommendation is not to exceed 20,000 items (as long as you've designed your infrastructure correctly) From: Mayo, Shay [mailto:shay.m...@absg.com] Sent: 23 March 2009 13:58 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance Hey Martin, I do understand that it is more of an Outlook thing but can you elaborate on "Control the items in their folders"? Thanks Shay From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 8:55 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance I don't think large mailboxes from an Exchange perspective are a performance issue. The issue mainly lies in Outlook performance and if your users can somehow learn to control the items in their folders, the performance will be fine. From: Mayo, Shay [mailto:shay.m...@absg.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 6:38 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Large Mailboxes Performance Hey, Just curious what type of performance people have had with large mailboxes on Exchange 2007. Our company has a strict email retention policy that purges email after 30 days, but we have about 200 people though that have special circumstances where they need to store email long term. We implemented an archiving product from C2C about 1 and ½ years ago which turned out to be a far less than desirable solution for our users. We have fully migrated to Exchange 2007 and are kicking around the idea of not having a 3rd party archiving system and just allowing larger mailboxes (3-10 GB) for these special users. So my question is, what kind of performance have you guys seen with mailboxes this large? Do they benefit from Office 2k7 or have they actually ran fine with Office2k3? Lastly, a lot of these users travel and will be using cached Exchange mode. So I am mainly worried about performance from large OSTs.... Thanks Shay Mayo // Systems Administrator AmerisourceBergen Specialty Group Ph. 469-365-7160 // s...@absg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE. This electronic mail transmission may contain privileged and/or confidential information and is intended only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately return it to the sender, delete it and destroy it without reading it. Unintended transmission shall not constitute the waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE. This electronic mail transmission may contain privileged and/or confidential information and is intended only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately return it to the sender, delete it and destroy it without reading it. Unintended transmission shall not constitute the waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja ~
