RE: Strange behaviour after running ISINTEG
Check out Q article Q818830 We applied the single instance store hotfix before it was part of the Sept hotfix rollup. When we ran isinteg we had many mailboxes jump in size. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn Corbett Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 9:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Strange behaviour after running ISINTEG All, Recently we have been having some strange behaviours with user mailboxes, such as users being denied access to folders in their mailboxes, rules disappearing etc. After running ISINTEG on all stores (approx 20), a number of errors were found and fixed...all good so far. After remounting the stores everything looked fineuntil the next morning when people came back to work. A number of mailboxes had suddenly a LOT more mail in their inboxes and deleted items folders, some users over 200mb worth, which threw a lot of the organisation over the store limits and stopped them sending and receiving mail. We temporarily increased the store limits to cope with the problem, however we are still at a loss to explain what happened. After speaking with PSS, they are also at a bit of a loss as well. I've also checked Technet and other online resources, but no mention is made of this sort of problem. - Some users had no effect on their mailboxes - Some users had lots of mail return to either their deleted items or inbox (we are surmising that the way the message was originally deleted has determined where it came back to - shift-delete - back to inbox, deleted via deleted items - back to delete items). - The restored messages don't seem to be from the previous days. In all of the cases we have confirmed, messages deleted the couple of days previous didn't come back, but messages deleted prior to that did come back. Has anyone seen this behaviour before and could possibly explain what happened ? As with all of these things, the people most affected were senior management, and they are screaming for a satisfactory response. Config: Windows 2000 SP2 with hotfixes Exchange 2000 SP2 - 6 Servers, 2 badly affected, 1 with minor effects, 3 not affected at all Trend Scanmail installed on all servers 1 Storage group on each server, between 2 and 4 databases per storage group On the servers that were affected, only one or two of the 4 stores was affected. As far as we can determine, either Exchange wasn't properly cleaning out deleted items from mailboxes (but was reducing the size of mailboxes as users were under the mailbox limit cap until the messages were restored), OR something happened and exchange replayed some of the transaction logs restoring old messages (but in that case all of the stores in the storage group should have been affected, but weren't) Thoughts ? TIA Glenn Corbett _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange behaviour after running ISINTEG
Is that a premier only article ? cant seem to find it on technet. G. - Original Message - From: Kelley, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 6:34 PM Subject: RE: Strange behaviour after running ISINTEG Check out Q article Q818830 We applied the single instance store hotfix before it was part of the Sept hotfix rollup. When we ran isinteg we had many mailboxes jump in size. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn Corbett Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 9:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Strange behaviour after running ISINTEG All, Recently we have been having some strange behaviours with user mailboxes, such as users being denied access to folders in their mailboxes, rules disappearing etc. After running ISINTEG on all stores (approx 20), a number of errors were found and fixed...all good so far. After remounting the stores everything looked fineuntil the next morning when people came back to work. A number of mailboxes had suddenly a LOT more mail in their inboxes and deleted items folders, some users over 200mb worth, which threw a lot of the organisation over the store limits and stopped them sending and receiving mail. We temporarily increased the store limits to cope with the problem, however we are still at a loss to explain what happened. After speaking with PSS, they are also at a bit of a loss as well. I've also checked Technet and other online resources, but no mention is made of this sort of problem. - Some users had no effect on their mailboxes - Some users had lots of mail return to either their deleted items or inbox (we are surmising that the way the message was originally deleted has determined where it came back to - shift-delete - back to inbox, deleted via deleted items - back to delete items). - The restored messages don't seem to be from the previous days. In all of the cases we have confirmed, messages deleted the couple of days previous didn't come back, but messages deleted prior to that did come back. Has anyone seen this behaviour before and could possibly explain what happened ? As with all of these things, the people most affected were senior management, and they are screaming for a satisfactory response. Config: Windows 2000 SP2 with hotfixes Exchange 2000 SP2 - 6 Servers, 2 badly affected, 1 with minor effects, 3 not affected at all Trend Scanmail installed on all servers 1 Storage group on each server, between 2 and 4 databases per storage group On the servers that were affected, only one or two of the 4 stores was affected. As far as we can determine, either Exchange wasn't properly cleaning out deleted items from mailboxes (but was reducing the size of mailboxes as users were under the mailbox limit cap until the messages were restored), OR something happened and exchange replayed some of the transaction logs restoring old messages (but in that case all of the stores in the storage group should have been affected, but weren't) Thoughts ? TIA Glenn Corbett _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Icon's and piping username/domain/password.
Cool! Maybe some enterprising student can log into both email accounts and send messages to each spouse. I hate you you're fat you're bald I want a divorce -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (pfeffepe) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 3:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Icon's and piping username/domain/password. I've already expressed the security concerns. They want to use the full blown outlook with each of them having their own icon on the same computer to click on and automatically log them into their separate mailbox. I know...it's scary, but I'm not going to tell the new President of the University no. I feel like a little worm on a big hook (crow). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 3:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Icon's and piping username/domain/password. You didn't say whether both of these accounts are regular Exchange accounts or other. If you set her up w/ Outlook Express for that, you can save the authentication in the accounts and all she would have to do is click on the 'send/receive' button. Might still have the issue of separating the mail between the two accounts though. If they are both Exchange server accounts, she can add the other mailbox to her Outlook profile and open them both at the same time. See http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/links.htm#addtobar. Oh, and that 'bother' with putting in login information, in general terms that's a security issue, though some CEOs never heard of the topic. Has something to do with why the @#$% logins and passwords are required in the first place. Sheesh. -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (pfeffepe) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Icon's and piping username/domain/password. Exchange 5.5 We have a new president coming into the University who has some unusual requests. She would like to have two separate icons available on her desktop which point to two separate outlook accounts which will pipe in the username/domain/password. One for herself and one for the husband. She does not want to be bothered with typing in login information. Never heard of this request before, so I thought I would post it. Thanks in advance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang= english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changing License key.
Is it possible to change the license key from evaluation to fully supported or do you have to do a complete re-install? Is it the same for upgrading from Standard server to enterprise? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Slightly OT: MOM with Exchange Module
Is anyone using MOM with the Exchange 2000 module pack? I'm interested in knowing how useful it is in monitoring Exchange and alerting you when something is wrong with exchnage. Thanks, Carmila This email message may contain information that is confidential and proprietary to Babcock Brown or a third party. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy the original and any copies of the original message. Babcock Brown takes measures to protect the content of its communications. However, Babcock Brown cannot guarantee that email messages will not be intercepted by third parties or that email messages will be free of errors or viruses. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
