ournaling isn't set in stone. If
performance becomes an issue, I can always change how it's done.
-Original Message-
From: James Wells [mailto:jam...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 8:36 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question
gt; Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 8:36 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question
>
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa996802(EXCHG.65).aspx
>
> Its smart enough to not journal twice
> I was speaking more to the db overhead of
e 22, 2009 8:36 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa996802(EXCHG.65).aspx
Its smart enough to not journal twice
I was speaking more to the db overhead of having both recipient AND
the journal mbx on the sam
gt;
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Kern [mailto:tpk...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 4:46 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question
>
> MSFT recommends the same thing
>
> Think about it in terms
t practice.
-Original Message-
From: Tom Kern [mailto:tpk...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 4:46 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question
MSFT recommends the same thing
Think about it in terms of disk i/o etc-
in that config you are journaling t
MSFT recommends the same thing
Think about it in terms of disk i/o etc-
in that config you are journaling the journal mailbox to the journal mailbox
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:56 PM, John
Hornbuckle wrote:
> I’m a journaling noob, and am setting up journaling for use with
> Google/Postini.
>
>
>
I'm a journaling noob, and am setting up journaling for use with Google/Postini.
Google says that the journaling mailbox can't be in the same database that
you're configuring journaling for.
How come?
John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, F
