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.
>
>
>
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
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
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; 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
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
