Re: PF replication

[Rob Sargent]

Or maybe there really is only 2gb of PF data?  Maybe your source PF store,
which indicates 12gb, has lots of white space?  Does it look like there are
replicas on the target server of all folders?

Rob
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Level Five - List wrote:

>  Okay, what am I missing, I have 2 ex2k7sp2 servers that im trying to
> replicate PF data. The data is about 12GB which isn’t a lot but its dozens
> of folders and hundreds of permissions.
>
>
>
> I started replication a month ago, replication got to about 2gb on the 
> 2ndserver and it hasn’t moved since.
>
>
>
> The other day I spun up a new vm as a test , installed exchange and ran the
> replication scripts. When I goto the primary server I see the new server in
> all the replication lists of all the folders. I waited about a day, I see
> the primarypf messages in the queues going to the new 3rd server. The
> server got to about 2.1gb and hasn’t moved now in 24 hours and I don’t see
> anything in the queues.
>
>
>
> As a test I made sure that all the limits were off, and i had previously
> lifted the 300k limit to 3k as a test for replication and that didn’t
> change anything either.
>
>
>
> So im either missing something very basic, or im going to just extract,
> delete, re-create all the pf’s on the new server and manually do all
> permissions (can pfwebdav export perms?) or if there is a tool to extract
> those would be appreciated .. the fact that 2 other servers are stopping
> right @ 2gb makes me think there is something I didn’t set correctly as far
> as size or similar.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
> with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
>

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

RE: PF replication

[Level Five - List]

Its definitely not caught up, when I do a get-publicfolderstatistics command
on each server the totals are very different, the new server is missing lots
of data, a few folders are complete and many are completely empty. This
happened to me the first time, so maybe there is something corrupted on the
sending server that gets stuck. The first time I did this had similar
results, the db got to about 2gb and never replicated anything else. 

 

Im looking to turn up some logging again to see if I can find errors.  

 

 

From: Rob Sargent [mailto:rbsr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 9:40 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: PF replication

 

Or maybe there really is only 2gb of PF data?  Maybe your source PF store,
which indicates 12gb, has lots of white space?  Does it look like there are
replicas on the target server of all folders?


Rob

On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Level Five - List 
wrote:

Okay, what am I missing, I have 2 ex2k7sp2 servers that im trying to
replicate PF data. The data is about 12GB which isn't a lot but its dozens
of folders and hundreds of permissions. 

 

I started replication a month ago, replication got to about 2gb on the 2nd
server and it hasn't moved since.

 

The other day I spun up a new vm as a test , installed exchange and ran the
replication scripts. When I goto the primary server I see the new server in
all the replication lists of all the folders. I waited about a day, I see
the primarypf messages in the queues going to the new 3rd server. The server
got to about 2.1gb and hasn't moved now in 24 hours and I don't see anything
in the queues.

 

As a test I made sure that all the limits were off, and i had previously
lifted the 300k limit to 3k as a test for replication and that didn't
change anything either.

 

So im either missing something very basic, or im going to just extract,
delete, re-create all the pf's on the new server and manually do all
permissions (can pfwebdav export perms?) or if there is a tool to extract
those would be appreciated .. the fact that 2 other servers are stopping
right @ 2gb makes me think there is something I didn't set correctly as far
as size or similar.

 

Thanks

 

 

 

---
To manage subscriptions click here:
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

 

---
To manage subscriptions click here:
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist


---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

RE: PF replication, latency and archiving

[Eric Hanna]

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: 
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: PF replication, latency and archiving

[Kurt Buff]

We have an Exchange 2003 server at each location.

No way we're going to spend more money on more infrastructure, though.
One instance of SEA is all we're going to get.

However, we are message journaling the foreign offices back to the US
office. I'm hoping that helps significantly.

Kurt

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:17, Eric Hanna  wrote:
> 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: 
> 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                ~
>
>

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

Re: PF replication, latency and archiving

[Kurt Buff]

Hit send too soon...

Also, we've been manually archiving the message journaling mailbox for
years, and saving the daily PST files to disk and tape.

Kurt

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:17, Eric Hanna  wrote:
> 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: 
> 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                ~
>
>

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: PF replication, latency and archiving

[Sobey, Richard A]

PF replication will always take a lesser precedent to normal mail traffic, and 
you can configure it to happen out of hours, if any such things exists in your 
company.

You might also have the luxury - depending on costs and how much time you have 
- of setting up an Exchange PF store on a new server locally, replicating your 
PFs to it, then shipping it off somewhere. 

Cheers :)


From: bounce-8549838-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com 
[bounce-8549838-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Buff 
[kurt.b...@gmail.com]
Sent: 28 May 2009 19:48
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: PF replication, latency and archiving

[Kurt Buff]

That will probably prove useful. I'll make note of that during the
conversations we have.

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 13:29, Sobey, Richard A  wrote:
> PF replication will always take a lesser precedent to normal mail traffic, 
> and you can configure it to happen out of hours, if any such things exists in 
> your company.
>
> You might also have the luxury - depending on costs and how much time you 
> have - of setting up an Exchange PF store on a new server locally, 
> replicating your PFs to it, then shipping it off somewhere.
>
> Cheers :)
>
> 
> From: bounce-8549838-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com 
> [bounce-8549838-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Buff 
> [kurt.b...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 28 May 2009 19:48
> 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                ~
>
>

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~