RE: PF replication, latency and archiving
Kurt, Speaking on the SEA side of things, it sounds like Exchange is housed at each respective location? If so, it might be best to have a SEA server at each location so that you don't have to archive and retrieve over your WAN (which could cause some bandwidth issues once everything is set up). If you did set up SEA in this manner, you would likely use separate location IDs for each server, i.e. US would be Location ID 1, UK would be Location ID 2, and AU would be Location ID 3. As SEA uses Outlook Forms for retrieving purposes, no matter where they are (depending on network and SEA set up) an employee would be able to retrieve messages from the respective SEA server on or off the WAN. Hopefully, this helps somewhat... Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist Sunbelt Software email: supp...@sunbeltsoftware.com Voice: 1-877-673-1153 x 500 Web: http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com Physical Address: 33 N Garden Ave Suite 120 Clearwater, FL 33755 United States -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: PF replication, latency and archiving All, We're implementing SEA here, and have three offices - one here in the US, one in the UK and one in AU. The latency between offices for data transfer is pretty huge, as you might expect, with the further handicap that the UK office has a consumer grade DSL connection of 768/128. To illustrate the problem, a robocopy of about 35gb from the US office to the AU office took nearly two weeks - and they have a 2mb SDSL connection. The AU office has about 30gb in mailboxes and 3gb in PFs, the UK office has about 42gb in mailboxes and 21gb in PFs. Only some of the PFs are replicated to the US office - I don't know how exactly many at the moment, but it's probably fewer than half. Questions: 1) Do any of you have a similar situation with latency? If so, how does SEA perform for you? 2) I think it makes sense to replicate all foreign office PFs to the US office, on the theory that SEA will pull replicas locally, and that native Exchange replication will be gentler on bandwidth consumption than SEA. Can anyone confirm or disconfirm this theory? Any thoughts on this welcome... Kurt ~ 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~
RE: Exchange archiving
In my experience, the load on the Exchange server tends to depend on how many mailboxes are being journaled, the amount of journaling mailboxes, and how much traffic is being ran through the Exchange server. Based on these factors, I would say you will probably see about a 5-15% increase in utilization (rough estimate but is what I generally see). As for how granular journaling is: Exchange 2003 is set on the store level while Exchange 2007 can be set at the mailbox level. Lastly, my 2pennies worth for the archiving: There are lots of solutions out there for archiving from open source to products like Symantec Vault. Enabling journaling for Exchange archiving is a popular way to go as it ensures capture of inbound and outbound traffic instead of interacting with individual mailboxes. While this gets your compliancy side, it doesn't do anything for your store sizes. Products like SEA (yes, a shameless plug) are able to archive your journaling mailbox (and only keep a copy for the archives) and also archive mailboxes individually. This will get your compliancy side as well as getting your information store reduced. While all solutions serve their function, it really depends on what you want to accomplish while archiving. Are you looking for archiving as a compliancy solution and/or do you want to get your information store sizes down? Is it more beneficial for you and your company to use a hosting company or would you like to keep it in-house? Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist Sunbelt Software From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 10:43 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange archiving I am beginning to look into our options for archiving Exchange 2003. It seems like most solutions involve enabling journaling on the exchange server and having the server grab a copy of every email that is sent and received. Then (with a hosted solution for example), the copies of emails get securely sent over the internet to the hosting company's servers where we can log in and view/retrieve them for an archive period. Depending on the length of archiving and the amount of data, cost seems to be around $300 - $600 month. I assume in-house solutions (where you have the journaling service send copies of everything to your own in-house server) is also an option? In either case, how do I know my server can handle enabling journaling? There has to be some major performance impact? Also I assume you can enable journaling on a single (or couple) of test mailboxes? Is this what others are doing? Thanks ... ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange archiving
Depends on your solution. There are some out there that just do log shipping from the Exchange server and don't do anything for the store size. There are some that only archive the journaling mailbox and don't have anything to do with the individual mailboxes (though you will be reducing the size of your journaling mailbox). The other thing, if you want to archive mailboxes, will be your end-user experience. There are plenty of solutions that will archive the mailbox, however, the end-user experience will be changed. For example, some will keep the message but to view the message you have to click a link in the preview pane. Some will move the message completely out of its original folder and put it into its own archive structure so that you have to do a search on the archives to find the message. Lastly, a few solutions actually use Outlook forms (SEA) to keep the messages as close to the original as possible. The preview pane will look the same and you can still double-click the message to open it up and have it look the same as it did before archival. Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist Sunbelt Software From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 11:28 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange archiving Thanks for the reply. We have just started discussing archiving, and while compliancy is a goal, I suppose it would be nice to reduce the size of the store. I would think that once you have enabled any archiving solution, you will be reducing your store? Won't messages that people are keeping now be archived (moved out of the store) thus reducing the size, and allowing for lower mailbox limits? Thx From: Eric Hanna [mailto:eri...@sunbelt-software.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 11:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange archiving In my experience, the load on the Exchange server tends to depend on how many mailboxes are being journaled, the amount of journaling mailboxes, and how much traffic is being ran through the Exchange server. Based on these factors, I would say you will probably see about a 5-15% increase in utilization (rough estimate but is what I generally see). As for how granular journaling is: Exchange 2003 is set on the store level while Exchange 2007 can be set at the mailbox level. Lastly, my 2pennies worth for the archiving: There are lots of solutions out there for archiving from open source to products like Symantec Vault. Enabling journaling for Exchange archiving is a popular way to go as it ensures capture of inbound and outbound traffic instead of interacting with individual mailboxes. While this gets your compliancy side, it doesn't do anything for your store sizes. Products like SEA (yes, a shameless plug) are able to archive your journaling mailbox (and only keep a copy for the archives) and also archive mailboxes individually. This will get your compliancy side as well as getting your information store reduced. While all solutions serve their function, it really depends on what you want to accomplish while archiving. Are you looking for archiving as a compliancy solution and/or do you want to get your information store sizes down? Is it more beneficial for you and your company to use a hosting company or would you like to keep it in-house? Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist Sunbelt Software From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 10:43 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange archiving I am beginning to look into our options for archiving Exchange 2003. It seems like most solutions involve enabling journaling on the exchange server and having the server grab a copy of every email that is sent and received. Then (with a hosted solution for example), the copies of emails get securely sent over the internet to the hosting company's servers where we can log in and view/retrieve them for an archive period. Depending on the length of archiving and the amount of data, cost seems to be around $300 - $600 month. I assume in-house solutions (where you have the journaling service send copies of everything to your own in-house server) is also an option? In either case, how do I know my server can handle enabling journaling? There has to be some major performance impact? Also I assume you can enable journaling on a single (or couple) of test mailboxes? Is this what others are doing? Thanks ... ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Very Important Swine Flu Tip
Kurt, Replying by email is something you can't do currently, however, there are ways to do it and we are looking at something like this in the future. If you do the email subscriptions, there is always a link included that takes you right to the thread...consolation prize? Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist Sunbelt Software -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 6:40 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Very Important Swine Flu Tip Can I use email to post? On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 14:53, Eric Hanna eri...@sunbelt-software.com wrote: Kurt, Don't know if this eases the sting at all but the forum can still send out emails based on new and updated threads. In order to receive emails for when a new post has been made, sign in, click on profile, click on personal options and under Category Subscription, highlight all of the desired forums and then choose Update Profile to save your selections. Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist A+ Sunbelt Software email: supp...@sunbeltsoftware.com Voice: 1-877-673-1153 x 500 Web: http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com Physical Address: 33 N Garden Ave Suite 120 Clearwater, FL 33755 United States -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 5:39 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Very Important Swine Flu Tip No email for Vipre, Ninja, etc.? That's sad. We're using Vipre @$WORK, and I was going to subscribe to them. Web-based fora just don't do it for me. I don't like having to go to multiple web sites to get my information. On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 12:19, Sherry Abercrombie saber...@gmail.com wrote: Ralph, the Exchange and NTSysadmin list IS NOT going to a forum based model. It is only the Vipre, Ninja etc ones that are being switched. On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Kim Longenbaugh k...@colonialsavings.com wrote: .last few days.? wuzzup with that? From: Ralph Smith [mailto:m...@gatewayindustries.org] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 2:15 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Very Important Swine Flu Tip I think that was more the last administration's type of response. Maybe we can really kill this list on its last few days with a good political argument! From: Kim Longenbaugh [mailto:k...@colonialsavings.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 3:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Very Important Swine Flu Tip Yep, just another of the many good things the present administration is bringing our country. Next: martial law to combat the spread of this vicious disease.? From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 2:03 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Very Important Swine Flu Tip Haven't been paying much attention to this; until I just got this WP alert: Administration Aide Suspected of Contracting Swine Flu Yikes. FTA: A member of the security advance team for President Obama's recent trip to Mexico is suspected of having contracted the swine flu and transmitted it to his family in Anne Arundel County, the White House said today. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/30/AR2009043001836.html?hpid%3Dtopnewssub=AR From: Kim Longenbaugh [mailto:k...@colonialsavings.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:54 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Very Important Swine Flu Tip At least the pig doesn't live in Egypt, it would definitely be at-risk there. From: Jeff Brown [mailto:2jbr...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Very Important Swine Flu Tip Probably more reason to be concerned for the pig... not sure you could get that virus by kissing the pig. Not that I'm willing to try. On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 1:46 PM, MarvinC marv...@gmail.com wrote: Don't forget patients #1 - the person taking the picture and #2 the one standing behind her as I'm sure they kissed her. Scary, a gesture once innocent and harmless. hope she's OK. On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.com wrote: So that was patient 0! On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Eric Wittersheim ewittersh...@aasmnet.org wrote: J From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:pmaglin...@scvl.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: OT: Very Important Swine Flu Tip As a public service, I humbly submit the following tip to avoid the swine flu epidemic: Don't do this... Confidentiality Notice: ** This communication, including any attachments, may
RE: Very Important Swine Flu Tip
Kurt, Don't know if this eases the sting at all but the forum can still send out emails based on new and updated threads. In order to receive emails for when a new post has been made, sign in, click on profile, click on personal options and under Category Subscription, highlight all of the desired forums and then choose Update Profile to save your selections. Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist A+ Sunbelt Software email: supp...@sunbeltsoftware.com Voice: 1-877-673-1153 x 500 Web: http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com Physical Address: 33 N Garden Ave Suite 120 Clearwater, FL 33755 United States -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 5:39 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Very Important Swine Flu Tip No email for Vipre, Ninja, etc.? That's sad. We're using Vipre @$WORK, and I was going to subscribe to them. Web-based fora just don't do it for me. I don't like having to go to multiple web sites to get my information. On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 12:19, Sherry Abercrombie saber...@gmail.com wrote: Ralph, the Exchange and NTSysadmin list IS NOT going to a forum based model. It is only the Vipre, Ninja etc ones that are being switched. On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Kim Longenbaugh k...@colonialsavings.com wrote: .last few days.? wuzzup with that? From: Ralph Smith [mailto:m...@gatewayindustries.org] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 2:15 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Very Important Swine Flu Tip I think that was more the last administration's type of response. Maybe we can really kill this list on its last few days with a good political argument! From: Kim Longenbaugh [mailto:k...@colonialsavings.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 3:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Very Important Swine Flu Tip Yep, just another of the many good things the present administration is bringing our country. Next: martial law to combat the spread of this vicious disease.? From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 2:03 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Very Important Swine Flu Tip Haven't been paying much attention to this; until I just got this WP alert: Administration Aide Suspected of Contracting Swine Flu Yikes. FTA: A member of the security advance team for President Obama's recent trip to Mexico is suspected of having contracted the swine flu and transmitted it to his family in Anne Arundel County, the White House said today. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/30/AR2009043001836.html?hpid%3Dtopnewssub=AR From: Kim Longenbaugh [mailto:k...@colonialsavings.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:54 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Very Important Swine Flu Tip At least the pig doesn't live in Egypt, it would definitely be at-risk there. From: Jeff Brown [mailto:2jbr...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Very Important Swine Flu Tip Probably more reason to be concerned for the pig... not sure you could get that virus by kissing the pig. Not that I'm willing to try. On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 1:46 PM, MarvinC marv...@gmail.com wrote: Don't forget patients #1 - the person taking the picture and #2 the one standing behind her as I'm sure they kissed her. Scary, a gesture once innocent and harmless. hope she's OK. On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.com wrote: So that was patient 0! On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Eric Wittersheim ewittersh...@aasmnet.org wrote: J From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:pmaglin...@scvl.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: OT: Very Important Swine Flu Tip As a public service, I humbly submit the following tip to avoid the swine flu epidemic: Don't do this... Confidentiality Notice: ** This communication, including any attachments, may contain confidential information and is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. Any review, dissemination, or copying of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email, delete and destroy all copies of the original message. -- Sherry Abercrombie Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Arthur C. Clarke ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam
RE: Microsoft Recommends Against Stubbing
Stefan, I agree with Michael and every solution will have pros and cons, the sales reps will push their pros to make you forget their cons...it is just a fact. I do work with SEA on a constant basis and can probably give a little insight into your concerns. SEA does use retention policies so that it can delete shortcuts after a given amount of time. The message is still archived, but is not present to the end-user unless they go to archives. Outlook being slow due to a growing number of emails in it has nothing to do with it being stubbed or not. It doesn't matter if you have 5GB of regular old email or you have 5GB of stubbed messages, it is going to take time to load. As for the search problems, SEA actually keeps the content of the message in outlook, as part of the stub. This means you can actually use Outlook search for stubbed messages that still reside in Outlook, just like you would for non-stubbed messages. I am sure other applications have the same tools but, for example, SEA can use full-text indexing in which you can add an outlook add-in to your client and search all archived items for this user (there is also a web application that uses this too). True, this is only for archived messages and, true, if you are archiving for several years, it will be a slower but the search results allow you to search all archived messages and have the ability to return searches based on archive dates, modified dates, archived dates, from, to, etc. Oops, guess I took too long to respond. I can stop typing now :) Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist Sunbelt Software From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:sj...@amico.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 3:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: FW: Microsoft Recommends Against Stubbing I'm looking to Purchase Sunbelt SEA but maybe I should not! This is from the competition that's try to sell me an appliance. ___ Stefan Jafs Stefan, I had the opportunity to view the Sunbelt demo today. I did not know that they used stubbing instead of journaling. Here's some information to consider straight from Microsoft: From Ferris Research: An important feature of email archiving is called stubbing. This is a process whereby an entire email or just the attachment is removed from Exchange and replaced with a stub file. When the user opens the message in Outlook, the stub file retrieves the archived email and/or attachment from the archive. The benefit is reduced Exchange storage. Microsoft is now recommending against the use of stubbing: * Search problems. If you retain months (and years) of stub files, several hundred thousand messages will be processed in this way. The probability of successfully locating a specific message with Outlook search is greatly reduced when you do not have a significant portion of the message body available. Users need to go to the archive multiple times to find a desired message. Third-party email archiving solutions solve the problem of mailbox size, but they reduce search efficiency and increase user time performing multiple searches. * Performance. If folders contain a large number of messages, even ones just consisting of stubs, Outlook slows down a lot. Microsoft therefore recommends that third-party email archiving solutions be configured to move email content completely out of the mailbox without retaining stub files in the mailbox. For more information, read this TechNet articlehttp://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc671168(EXCHG.80).aspx. The information targets Exchange 2007, but it is also relevant for Exchange 2003 systems considering third-party email archiving. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Amico Corporation. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. ... ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange Archiving
As I haven't looked into what Mailarchiva is or how Mailarchiva works, I was just doing some research on their website. It looks like you want to go with the Open Source version. According to their documentation, as how I read it, that might not be available to do all of your 35 mailboxes individually. You may have to look into the Enterprise version to do what you want. Here is the excerpt: I thought the Open Source Edition supports archiving of multiple mailboxes, yet I can only see one place where a mailbox is defined? The mailbox definition in MailArchivahttp://knowledge.stimulussoft.com/bin/view/Main/MailArchiva is used to connect to a journal account in Microsoft Exchange and not individual mailboxes. MS Exchange has the capability to forward all incoming, outgoing and internal emails to a journal account. To archive all emails in an organization, you would simply enter the login information of the journal mailbox in the mailbox definition. MailArchivahttp://knowledge.stimulussoft.com/bin/view/Main/MailArchiva will then retrieve all emails from the journal account and delete them once they have been received so as not to jam up the mail server. The Enterprise Edition supports the configuration of multiple mailboxes as it is designed to work with more than one Exchange servers and Exchange stores. Thus, it can retrieve emails from more than one journal account. Just an FYI...link: http://knowledge.stimulussoft.com/bin/view/Main/FrequentlyAskedQuestions Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist Sunbelt Software ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange Archiving
That makes sense. I was interpreting that you can only use one mailbox for the OS version and as many mailboxes as you wanted with the Enterprise version. I guess it is really up to how your environment is since this would be great for compliancy sake (to just archive a journaling mailbox), however, according to the OP it looks like he wanted to also reduce the size of the information stores. Of course, we all know how much a journaling mailbox can take up on a store, so archiving it could certainly accomplish a portion of this too :) Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist Sunbelt Software -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 3:46 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange Archiving Both seem to be based on Message Journalling - it's just that their Enterprise version can to talk with multiple Message Journalling mailboxes on different Exchange servers, while the Open Source or Community version can only do one server with one Message Journalling mailbox. That should be sufficient for the OP's needs. Kurt On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 9:07 AM, Eric Hanna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As I haven't looked into what Mailarchiva is or how Mailarchiva works, I was just doing some research on their website. It looks like you want to go with the Open Source version. According to their documentation, as how I read it, that might not be available to do all of your 35 mailboxes individually. You may have to look into the Enterprise version to do what you want. Here is the excerpt: I thought the Open Source Edition supports archiving of multiple mailboxes, yet I can only see one place where a mailbox is defined? The mailbox definition in MailArchiva is used to connect to a journal account in Microsoft Exchange and not individual mailboxes. MS Exchange has the capability to forward all incoming, outgoing and internal emails to a journal account. To archive all emails in an organization, you would simply enter the login information of the journal mailbox in the mailbox definition. MailArchiva will then retrieve all emails from the journal account and delete them once they have been received so as not to jam up the mail server. The Enterprise Edition supports the configuration of multiple mailboxes as it is designed to work with more than one Exchange servers and Exchange stores. Thus, it can retrieve emails from more than one journal account. Just an FYI...link: http://knowledge.stimulussoft.com/bin/view/Main/FrequentlyAskedQuestions Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist Sunbelt Software ~ 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~
Exchange archive/PST consolidation
I am sure that there are a few different ways to go about archiving email but the two main ways that I have heard is using transaction log shipping and using stubbing. SEA uses the latter and there are positives and negatives using both ways. The best advantage that stubbing has is that you can take a several MB message and prune it to only several KB. If you are talking about adding several GB back to a mailbox, via PST, then it would be easy to assume that you will be adding several MB back to the mailbox and to the information store. If you aren't looking at limiting each mailbox to a certain size, then the obvious good of having a 700MB outweighs the obvious bad of having a 5GB mailbox. However, if you are using limits on mailboxes, which a lot of companies do, this leaves us with a conundrum to either raise limits or not archiving PSTs. While I am not familiar in how other archiving would handle this, in terms of Sunbelt Exchange Archiver the solution would be to do as follows. With SEA, every archived message can be left with a stub or shortcut of the original, make a straight back-up of the original message, or delete the original message. In each case the message is archived to SEA's archive store, full-text indexed, and can be searched using either the outlook add-in or the web application called ArchiveWeb. If you see where I am going with this, you could archive the messages from the PSTs using the delete the original message and index the message for searching using one of those tools. Essentially, you have best of both worlds : ) Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist Sunbelt Software ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
