backups
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
The default is 20GB if I remember correctly. But can be changed via
registry key if I also remember correctly.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevinm [NY]
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 11:40 AM
Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
The default is 20GB if I remember correctly. But can be changed via
registry key if I also remember correctly.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevinm [NY]
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 11:40
: Exchange 2003 backups
Didn't we set a limit at 16 gigs in stead of going for the big limit???
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Tuip
[MVP]
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 1:49 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Exchange 2003
PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 7:44 AM
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
Exchange 2003 pst files larger than 2gig are possible I believe.
Ronald R. Mazzotta Jr.
Director of IT
Schonbraun Safris McCann Bekritsky Co. L.L.C.
101 Eisenhower pky
Didn't we set a limit at 16 gigs in stead of going for the big limit???
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Tuip
[MVP]
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 1:49 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Exchange 2003 backups
32TB
Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
yes, this is my concern.
The main part of my question was what to backup and how often. ...and
retention setting for mailboxes and deleted items.
I need to figure out a robust policy which won't need tobe changed 6
months because of store bloating.
Import
Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
yes, this is my concern.
The main part of my question was what to backup and how often. ...and
retention setting for mailboxes and deleted items.
I need to figure out a robust policy which won't need tobe changed 6
months because of store bloating.
Import
: Friday, January 09, 2004 10:00 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
I have a PST larger than 2GB FWIW. Seems to work fine.
Yes, I'm mostly just being difficult.
-Original Message-
From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Friday, January 09, 2004
Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
yes, this is my concern.
The main part of my question was what to backup and how often. ...and
retention setting for mailboxes and deleted items.
I need to figure out a robust policy which won't need tobe changed 6 months
because of store bloating
: Exchange 2003 backups
Exchange 2003 pst files larger than 2gig are possible I believe.
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter
That's why E2003 handles them so well.
-Original Message-
From: Atkinson, Miles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 10:55 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
Err, Outlook 2003 has the ability to handle PST files in excess of 2Gb
PST = Bad.
themolk.
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2004 9:21 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange 2003 backups
Hi,
I have just moved from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2003.
It is a single server setup.
I
] On Behalf Of
Steve Molkentin
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2004 10:30 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
PST = Bad.
themolk.
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2004 9:21 AM
To: Exchange
Of Matthew Joyce
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 3:35 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
This seems to be a popular axiom, buy why are they considered bad ?
How else can I give users access to email from 2 years ago ?
yes, they do need to access these.
What do
in the FAQs, if not, certainly the archives.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Matthew Joyce
Sent: Thu 08/01/2004 23:35
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
This seems to be a popular axiom, buy why are they considered bad ?
How else
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 1:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
I'd recommend a public folder. That way, not only do you have access to
email from years ago, but all users (with correct permissions) have
access, instead of only the user who has it in a PST
] On Behalf Of Matthew Joyce
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 1:35 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
This seems to be a popular axiom, buy why are they considered bad ?
How else can I give users access to email from 2 years ago ?
yes, they do need to access these.
What do other
?
Certainly GuruEd (the MVP Slut) has raved against them previously. ;)
themolk.
-Original Message-
From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2004 9:40 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
If my users needed to access mail
Of Ben Schorr
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2004 10:56 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
Really big hard drives is how we do it.
Our users keep the mail they need and are encouraged to
dispose of the mail they don't need. Occasionally they do.
Of course, we have
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Steve Molkentin
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2004 10:30 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
PST = Bad.
themolk.
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2004 9:21 AM
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
PST's can have passwords put on them by users, and users forget them
(rendering them useless).
PST's do not synchronise (using WinXP's offline files feature), and so
can be forgotten or left behind, or worse, corrupted.
I think that we almost have an FAQ for why
and cost. If management thinks it is too expensive, get
their feedback and submit again.
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Thursday, January 08, 2004 7:21 PM
Posted To: swynk
Conversation: Exchange 2003 backups
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2004 12:03 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
Takes about 6 seconds to strip a password from a PST file
which renders them laughably insecure rather than useless. ;)
-Original Message
your new big disks on your exchange box!!
themolk.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2004 12:06 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
My retention policies and mailbox size limits are based on
what
Of Steve Molkentin
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 3:56 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
PST's can have passwords put on them by users, and users forget them
(rendering them useless).
PST's do not synchronise (using WinXP's offline files feature), and so can
Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 backups
The correct term is vendor whore. I am not a slut.
Ed Waiting for the Content Filters to Kick In Crowley
MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the
world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From
26 matches
Mail list logo
