Glaucous
Bob Fronk [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 6:16 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Outloot Limit on messages per folder In THAT FOLDER. Consider this example: a folder named folderX has 100 items. Each of those items has an itemType. itemType has two possible values: FolderItemType or ItemItemType. Any item that has an itemType of FolderItemType can be treated as either a Folder (which means it contains zero or more items based off the FolderItemRoot) or as an Item (which means it can be moved, deleted, etc. etc.) Regardless of the itemType of each individual item contained within folderX, as long as folderX has less than 5,000 items; it is considered performant. It is conceivable that all items within folderX are actually of FolderItemType, and that each FolderItemType contains hundreds of subitems. Those subitems are irrelevant. They do not affect the performance of folderX. Only those items directly contained within folderX will affect its performance. I hope that that is more clear. Regards, Michael B. Smith MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From: Bob Fronk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 1:16 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Outloot Limit on messages per folder So you are saying 5000 items TOTAL. Regardless if they have two subfolders or 100 subfolders? Bob Fronk [EMAIL PROTECTED] 859.321.4442 From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 3:12 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Outloot Limit on messages per folder In the Exchange database, everything is either a folder, or an item. That part of the schema is very flat. And often a folder is an item too - when you are performing operations on that folder. So, 1,000 or 5,000 items; whatever, in your critical path includes the folders; but it does NOT include the items within those folders. Regards, Michael B. Smith MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From: David Liu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 2:23 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Outloot Limit on messages per folder In this case, is there a performance hit difference between having 50+ subfolders under the Mailbox vs. having them under the Inbox ? We haave Symantec's Enterprise Vault in place to archive items in the mailbox but thus far we've been telling users to either create subfolders under the mailbox or under their inbox, eithe rway stubs are stubs & subfolders are just that & there is no difference -if there's benefit to one over the other, I'd be interested to hear, On 8/14/08 12:06 PM, "Micheal Espinola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Indeed, +pi. This has been bothersome aspect for a few years now since the introduction of search folders instead of sub folders, but we cant have all items in the inbox without some sort of archival process to negate performance issues. The Exchange team really needs to get on the ball with this. Especially with the dependence of mobile platforms that dont handle sub foldering well. On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Martin Blackstone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Indeed. Outlook is in need of some major design changes to deal with the > large mailboxes people have today (and larger tomorrow). > > Even with mail archival solutions in place, what's the difference if I have > 20,000 messages or 20,000 stubs? > > > > > > From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 5:54 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Outloot Limit on messages per folder > > > > Funny - Microsoft wants to encourage the use of "search folders" etc that > make actual folders obsolete, yet the product (apparently) can't handle > having a few thousand items in an actual folder, necessitating the use of > physical folders... > > > > Cheers > > Ken > > > > From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, 14 August 2008 10:26 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Outloot Limit on messages per folder > > > > You don't need an archive strategy per say, just better mailbox management. > > I use sub folders under my inbox for older mail. > > Say a folder called 2007, 2006, etc. > > > > Yes, they have more than 5000 items, but I rarely hit them, so I can live > with it. > > > > From: Fergal O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 5:19 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Outloot Limit on messages per folder > > > > Exchange 2007 > > Outlook 2003 Sp3. > > > > I knew I saw a KB article about this before - > > Just need some proof before I can confront the user and advise on a archive > strategy. > > All mails are going to the Inbox and not a sub folder. > > > > > > > > From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 14 August 2008 13:02 > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Outloot Limit on messages per folder > > > > What version of Outlook and is this the Inbox or a sub folder. Is this a > PST, OST, or Exchange format. I know with Outlook 2003 using a PST things > usually got sluggish but that depended also on the total disk space being > used and whether I had upgraded to the later version of the PST or was still > using the Outlook 97-2000 version of a PST. > > > > Jon > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 7:40 AM, Fergal O'Connell > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi All > > > > What is the max amount of messages a folder in Outlook should contain? > > > > I have a user with approx 20000 messages in his Inbox and Outlook is causing > problems > > > > > > > > Regards > > Fergal O'Connell > > ICT Support > > > > The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. > > It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else > > is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, > > copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance > > on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended > > addressee please contact the sender and dispose of this e-mail. Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. > > It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else > > is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, > > copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance > > on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended > > addressee please contact the sender and dispose of this e-mail. Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- ME2 ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
