RE: Single Instance Storage

Nope. It resets the pointers. -Original Message- From: Dave Vantine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 1:01 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage Out of curiosity, does using the "Ed Crowley Server Move Method" break SIS. It would seem to

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

My previous response (to the other thread) was incorrect. Apparently we're down to 2100 mailboxes Total SIS Ratio = 65 - Storage Group 1 (1250 Mailboxes) = 82 - Storage Group 2 (850 Mailboxes) = 35 - Sean On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Ben Scott wrote: > Hi all, > > A thread on nt-sys

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

1.26 here. Joe P -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Hi all, A thread on nt-sysadmin has got me wondering. Just how much do people actually bene

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

1.46 92 mailboxes. -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 12:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Hi all, A thread on nt-sysadmin has got me wondering. Just how much do people actually

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

14.5 184 mailboxes Exchange 2003 -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Hi all, A thread on nt-sysadmin has got me wondering. Just how much do peop

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

I'm seeing 226.771 on my Exchange 2003 box with about 130 mailboxes. Is that probable? Roger Wright Network Administrator Evatone, Inc. 727.572.7076 x388 _ -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:31 PM To: MS-Exchange

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Is the Scale supposed to be at 1.000? If so, I've got a problem - mine is at 122.040. Sean Rector, MCSE -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Hi all,

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

3.35 -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 12:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Hi all, A thread on nt-sysadmin has got me wondering. Just how much do people actually benefit from SI

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

645 mailboxes = 49 -Paul From: Sean Martin [mailto:seanmarti...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 12:39 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey My previous response (to the other thread) was incorrect. Apparently

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

I forgot to add...78 mailboxes... Sean Rector, MCSE -Original Message- From: Sean Rector [mailto:sean.rec...@vaopera.org] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 2:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Is the Scale supposed to be at 1.000? If so

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

al Message- From: Sean Rector [mailto:sean.rec...@vaopera.org] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Is the Scale supposed to be at 1.000? If so, I've got a problem - mine is at 122.040. Sean Rector, MCSE -O

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

5.25 for 350 mailboxes On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Ben Scott wrote: > Hi all, > > A thread on nt-sysadmin has got me wondering. Just how much do > people actually benefit from SIS (Single Instance Storage) in > Exchange? > > Would people be willing to share their SIS ratio from their Exc

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

3.442 300 mailboxes E2K7 SP1 John W. Cook Systems Administrator Partnership For Strong Families Sent to you from my Blackberry in the Cloud - Original Message - From: Ralph Smith To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Fri May 29 14:13:07 2009 Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

>From the Explain text on the counter: Single Instance Ratio is the average number of references to each message in the mailbox store. On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Roger Wright wrote: > I'm seeing 226.771 on my Exchange 2003 box with about 130 mailboxes. > > Is that probable? > > > > Roger W

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Therefore, having a number almost double the actual number of mailboxes on the server, while not impossible, would definitely be improbable. TVK From: Rob Bonfiglio [mailto:robbonfig...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:24 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Single Instance

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

3.663 for ~150 mailboxes... On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Ben Scott wrote: > Hi all, > > A thread on nt-sysadmin has got me wondering. Just how much do > people actually benefit from SIS (Single Instance Storage) in > Exchange? > > Would people be willing to share their SIS ratio from the

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

4.221 for about 450 mailboxes. Andrew Greene IS Technician / Webmaster City of Anderson -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Hi all, A thread on n

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

l most commonly used within your organization. > TVK > > > -Original Message- > From: Sean Rector [mailto:sean.rec...@vaopera.org] > Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:14 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey > > Is

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

4.998 --- over 5k mailboxes. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.co

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

39.241 ~150 mailboxes E2003 -Original Message- From: Don Guyer [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 2:44 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey 4.998 --- over 5k mailboxes. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Interesting. 600 mailboxes 6.132 -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 11:31 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Hi all, A thread on nt-sysadmin has got me wondering. Just how much do peo

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

23.302 ~480 mailboxes E2K3 9 Information Stores On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Eldridge, Dave wrote: > Interesting. > 600 mailboxes > 6.132 > > > -Original Message- > From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 11:31 AM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Su

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

6.678 ~630 mailboxes -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 11:31 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Hi all, A thread on nt-sysadmin has got me wondering. Just h

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Only checked my domestic clusters Svr 1: 22 SG/DB's w/ 1236 mbxs @ 8.321 Svr 2: 40 SG/DB's w/ 4270 mbxs @ 6.475 -Original Message- From: John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 11:21 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Single Instance Sto

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Did you get those message count scripts to work? -Original Message- From: Barsodi.John [mailto:john.bars...@igt.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 3:27 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Only checked my domestic clusters Svr 1: 22 SG/DB

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

milar where all correspondence must be kept forever. TVK From: Rob Bonfiglio [mailto:robbonfig...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:35 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Interesting article. My previous place of employment was at a Unive

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Tim Vander Kooi wrote: > ... the higher the SI Ratio number ... the worse job your users are > doing of cleaning their mailboxes regularly. This idea that one shouldn't use an email system to store email always seemed kind of strange to me. Keep in mind that

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

kay... fangs in... hackles down... -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 4:18 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Tim Vander Kooi wrote: > ... the higher t

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

y 29, 2009 4:18 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Tim Vander Kooi wrote: > ... the higher the SI Ratio number ... the worse job your users are > doing of cleaning their mailboxes regularly. This idea that one

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

ssage- From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:pmaglin...@scvl.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 5:26 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Yeah, but then you have the guys that try to keep every @#...@#% email since the dawn of time in their mailbox. At least y

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 4:18 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Tim Vander Kooi wrote: > ... the higher the SI Ratio number ... the worse job your users are > doing of cl

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

E2K3 15,000 users, 14 DB x 200GB each, SIS average 2.43 -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, 30 May 2009 3:31 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Hi all, A thread on nt-sysadmin has got me wondering.

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Adding: 1)Number of users on server 2)Approximate age of server since installation (or DB creation) might be interesting as well. -sc -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instanc

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Doesn't seem like it should be with anything I'd consider "normal" user behavior. -sc -Original Message- From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 2:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

It's a ratio, so no. -sc -Original Message- From: Sean Rector [mailto:sean.rec...@vaopera.org] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 2:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Is the Scale supposed to be at 1.000? If so, I've got a problem -

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

, 2009 5:26 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Yeah, but then you have the guys that try to keep every @#...@#% email since the dawn of time in their mailbox. At least you're archiving it off somewhere. I have guys that have up to (6) 2GB per

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

-don-t-do-it.aspx - Rob -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:scaes...@caesare.com] Verzonden: zaterdag 30 mei 2009 6:52 Aan: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Onderwerp: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey We have some users wonder why opening their 20GB .pst (yes, _TWENT

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

I'm at 1.656 with around 500 mailboxes. The database would be, I guess, five or so years old (although we upgraded to Exchange 2007 last summer--not sure if the database-rebuilding that came with that would affect anything). We have a 250 MB mailbox size limit for nearly every user, so they have

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 4:18 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey This idea that one shouldn't use an email system to store email always seemed kind of strange to me. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Indeed... yet they still do it. And it get's worserer when they are ginormous. -sc -Original Message- From: Rob Hagman [mailto:r...@hagman.demon.nl] On Behalf Of li...@hagman.demon.nl Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 3:51 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance St

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Tim Vander Kooi wrote: > One could easily make the argument that the higher the SI Ratio number ... I'm just noticing that despite several posts arguing against the usefulness of SIS, you haven't posted any of your own SIS ratio numbers :-) -- Ben ~ Ninja

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

2.103 for 430 box -lpm -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 8:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Hi all, A thread on nt-sysadmin has got me wondering. Just how much do people actually

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

2.64 -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Tim Vander Kooi wrote: > One could easily make the argument t

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

No more SIS in E14... ~Kevinm WLKMMAS- This message is Certified Swine Flu Free My life http://www.hedonists.ca -Original Message- From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:tvanderk...@expl.com] Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 8:50 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Ours is 6.807 with ~400 mailboxes, db created 4 years ago. -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Hi all, A thread on nt-sysadmin has got me wonderi

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Tim Vander Kooi wrote: > 2.64 I guess you practice what you preach, then. :-) No biscuit for me! -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

I tend to shoot fairly straight. ;-) TVK -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 1:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Tim Vander Kooi wrote: > 2

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Kooi [mailto:tvanderk...@expl.com] Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 2:27 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey I tend to shoot fairly straight. ;-) TVK -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 1:14

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Except on the weekends... Shook -Original Message- From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:tvanderk...@expl.com] Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 2:27 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey I tend to shoot fairly straight. ;-) TVK -Original Message

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Well, if you would stop wearing your pink frilly tutu on Saturdays... TVK -Original Message- From: Andy Shook [mailto:andy.sh...@peak10.com] Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 3:12 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Except on the weekends

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Heck no!! Could you imagine if there were lots of little me's running around? Holy Schneikie's dude! TVK -Original Message- From: John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org] Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 1:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Storage ratio s

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

5.46 - 1864 MBs across 6 stores IMHO there's more benefit to archiving these days than SIS - but SIS had its day before archiving became a big player. OT: This will probably be my last post here - so - I want to say Thank You All for all the great tips and enlightenment. You've been a tremendous

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Congrats on retirement! Much luck to you. On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Moss, Susan K wrote: > 5.46 - 1864 MBs across 6 stores > > IMHO there's more benefit to archiving these days than SIS - but SIS had > its day before archiving became a big player. > > OT: > This will probably be my last p

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey Congrats on retirement! Much luck to you. On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Moss, Susan K wrote: 5.46 - 1864 MBs across 6 stores IMHO there's more benefit to archiving these days than SIS

RE: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Gainesville, Fl 32601 Office (352) 393-2741 x320 Cell (352) 215-6944 Fax (352) 393-2746 MCSE, MCTS, MCP+I, A+, N+, VSP -Original Message- From: Moss, Susan K [mailto:sm...@cas.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 7:42 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Single Instance Stora

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

Congratulations, Susan! Thank you for all your contributions here over the years. I hope you enjoy a wonderful retirement! -- ME2 On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Moss, Susan K wrote: > 5.46 - 1864 MBs across 6 stores > > IMHO there's more benefit to archiving these days than SIS - but SIS had

Re: Single Instance Storage ratio survey

On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 04:42, Moss, Susan K wrote: > OT: > This will probably be my last post here - so - I want to say Thank You > All for all the great tips and enlightenment.  You've been a tremendous > help over the years.  Been threatening to retire for awhile now - it is > becoming reality.

RE: single instance storage retention on mailbox move

Not sure on that one. Although I've done several moves, the SIS really wasn't an issue to be worried about (at least, not enough to stop the projects!). The article you reference refers to Exchange 5.5. There's also a snippit from an Exchange 2000 article that reads: "Single instance storage i

RE: single instance storage retention on mailbox move

Yes. SIS is retained with the mailbox move process. It is NOT retained with the exmerge process. William Lefkovics, MCSE, A+ --- Why just ride, when you can fly? http://www.airborne.net

RE: single instance storage retention on mailbox move

Depends on how you move the mail box. If you use "MOVE MAILBOX" in Exchange admin, then I believe that you do retain SIS, but you lose any mail that was in the user's "Deleted Items Retention" area of the Information Store. If you use EXMERGE to move the mail, they you loose SIS. John Matteson;

RE: single instance storage retention on mailbox move

: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 12:53 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: single instance storage retention on mailbox move Depends on how you move the mail box. If you use "MOVE MAILBOX" in Exchange admin, then I believe that you do retai