Thanks for the info, I remember having some problems with pfmigrate on a
2007 migration and never bothered to sort it out. Next time I'll look
for the right version.
-mb
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 5:18 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Is
Yes I do
__
Stefan Jafs
From: Bob Fronk [mailto:b...@btrfronk.com]
Sent: May-05-09 9:54 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange archiving
I have about 130 users and a 250GB store Wow.. you must have some strict
limits set.
Bob
I have about ~450 users. We recently switched from commvault to sunbelt
archiving. Still in the process of finalizing the move but currently the db's
are at 800gb, %50 white space. And the archived email is at 300gb. It would be
nice to have strict rules where the db's could be lower but the com
I have about 130 users and a 250GB store Wow.. you must have some strict
limits set.
Bob
From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 2:43 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange archiving
That's good to hear.
I have about 160 user
Ok that sounds like something else then
With RU7 if you hide a recipient from the address book, you get an
IMCEA encapsulated legdn and the DSN/NDR's from the "Micorsoft
Exchange"sender as a guid
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Michael B. Smith
wrote:
> I'm familiar with that issue, but it does
I'm familiar with that issue, but it doesn't address the problem that I
experienced.
I don't have anything "hidden from exchange addressbooks".
From: Tom Kern [tpk...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 8:03 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re:
RU7 addressed this -http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/956455/
One of the by products is what you are seeing
This is due to be correct in RU8
In the meantime a workaround is to unhide the mailbox
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Campbell, Rob
wrote:
> Ack. My bad. It’s SP1 w/roup
Ack. My bad. It's SP1 w/rollup 7.
I'll keep an eye on it, and let you know if I find anything. Right now, I'm
inclined toward investigating the DC's.
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 4:46 PM
To: MS-Exchange
Not that it helps you - but I ran into this in a server I maintain last week.
Also, OWA-originated emails had their "From:" header set to the
legacyExchangeDN of the sender, as opposed to the typical displayName.
I rebooted the server. That took care of it. I didn't have time to debug it as
too
I'm virtual running VMware 3.5, my SEA VM has 2 Processors and 4GB of vRAM, I
have a separate VM SQL and my data storage is currently and old DELL PE4600
with a 270GB drive.
I'm archiving after 30 days and retention is currently 5 years.
___
Stefan Jafs
From: Dav
That's good to hear.
I have about 160 users and currently have a 24GB store.
What kind of hardware is SEA running on? processor, storage?
How long are you archiving for?
thx
From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:sj...@amico.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 1:20 PM
To:
ah-hah. sweet, thanks.
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Michael B. Smith wrote:
> Which is why you must use the one from the downloaded exdeploy tools;
> which works cross-AG. The version on the CD does not.
>
> --
> *From:* Alex Fontana [afontana...@gmail.com]
> *
Which is why you must use the one from the downloaded exdeploy tools; which
works cross-AG. The version on the CD does not.
From: Alex Fontana [afontana...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 1:32 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: PFMigrate
I seem t
No,
As I said in the first email, it was a vm'ed lab scenario. I blew it out and
built another, same topology, different server names though. One dc, one
exchange server. Probably a Beta anomaly...
I'll make note of that event id the next time as I am will likely blow this one
out soon again:)
I seem to recall an issue with pfmigrate between Ex2003 and Ex2007 due to
the differing administrative groups...?
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 5:18 AM, Michael B. Smith
wrote:
> I still use pfmigrate quite regularly, as it gives better reporting and
> control.
>
> Make sure you use the version from Ex
Well...there used to be another server right? And AD knows about it...if
it's the same AD setup that is. If it is then a move-mailbox
-configurationonly is necessary to update AD. If this is a different
AD/Exchange Org then you may need to run a clean-mailboxdatabase to expose
the disconnected m
I have recently installed the SEA solution. I'm impressed, everything works, we
had a bit of a challenge with RPC / HTTP, we had to get another certificate
etc. but it's all good now and I had any help I needed from Sunbelt. The setup
was included in the cost and Sunbelt came in remotely and had
Sure, if you come across. I should have mentioned I did absolutely check the
logs expecting something if not at least an error and got nothing.
Thanks!
jlc
From: Sobey, Richard A [mailto:r.so...@imperial.ac.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 9:06 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange
I have a puzzle. Exchange 2007 SP2. Last night all the system mailbox cleanup
messages came through without the "Microsoft Exchange" display name. All they
show is the smtp address in Outlook. I also got reports of messages delivery
and read receipt notifications coming in the same way durin
It depends. I didn't realize you meant an environment that large.
Assuming the archive product empties the journal mailboxes often
enough, you can do that with about 12-20 journal mailbox targets.
I've implemented this before for that volume of users. Again...the
performance warnings never seem t
Exactly. Especially of you make changes along the lines of narrowing your
archiving window (say from 90 days to 60) I have to run an eseutil every so
often but I monitor the 1221 events to see when it will be worthwhile.
-Original Message-
From: James Wells [mailto:jam...@gmail.com]
Sent
I'm not sure a small server will handle journaling of all 60k+ active
users. Ok, just meant to point out that not all environments are equal.
-Original Message-
From: James Wells [mailto:jam...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 8:51 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Excha
Messages taken out are just going to leave you with whitespace. While
most of that space will be reused (thus reducing the growth of the
store over time), it will never reduce the size of the store on disk
without an offline defrag.
--James
On 5/5/09, David Mazzaccaro wrote:
> Thanks for the re
Every article I've seen that describes horrible performance seems to
be talking about having the journal mailbox on the same Exchange
server as the mailboxes being journaled.
In my experience, journaling should only be turned on if you have a
compliance reason to do so. If that's the case, let you
We archive, but it Journal's copies of the e-mail which is then
extracted out by the vendor and stored. So, it does not reduce the
Stores.
Don Guyer
Systems Engineer - Information Services
Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group
431 W. Lancaster Avenue
Devon, PA 19333
Direct: (610) 993-3299
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 siz
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 b
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 util
Well, think of it as you're moving the mailbox to a new database..but since the
mailbox data already exists within the EDB, all you want to do is update AD
with the new mailbox information.
Just out of interest, once you've completed steps 1-9, you should see entries
in the Application log rela
That's in essence what I did, except for the renaming. I made the new one the
same name but since it's a single exchange server setup, there was no
move-mailbox possible?
Oh well... I'll just assume broken in Beta :)
jlc
From: Sobey, Richard A [mailto:r.so...@imperial.ac.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, May
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
secure
I still use pfmigrate quite regularly, as it gives better reporting and control.
Make sure you use the version from ExDeploy.exe (available from
microsoft.com/downloads) and not the version on the Exchange 2003 CD.
From: Matthew Bullock [mbull...@root9.com]
Sent:
Assuming DB portability in 2010 works the same as 2007, these are the high
level steps I used to move all databases from one server to another. It works
lovely. I've taken some of my own notes out that relate specifically to my
organization.
1) Shut down Exchange on . Run ESEUTIL /MH
33 matches
Mail list logo
