At 00:02 6/5/2002, you wrote: I think it does little good to complain about a limitation, especially when it's so easily bypassed. This is MS's first full directory; if you were expecting something perfect, now or ever, you need to change fields. Be happy enough it was corrected in .NET.
>Hi, > >I do agree that in most cases, no one will be insane enuff to put 5000 >users in one group, the thing is why can't we? > >After all, we bought the s/ware so why can't we use it the way we want it? > >ERIC >----- Original Message ----- >From: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Hutchins, Mike >To: <mailto:'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'>'[EMAIL PROTECTED]' >Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 03:46 >Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory Limitations - max 5000 users per >group? > >The 5000 user limit is not a 5000 "user" limit, it is a 5000 Direct member >limit. I don't think anyone in their right mind would have 5000 users in >one group. I would suggest nesting them to make them more manageable anyways. > >FYI, .NET removes this limitation for the nutty people. >-----Original Message----- >From: AMAN, ALICE L. (JSC-GT4) (NASA) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 1:34 PM >To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' >Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory Limitations - max 5000 users per >group? > >Someone on slashdot.org (pro-linux site) indicated real-world problems >with AD >including: > >"Groups aren't scalable, supporting max 5000 users." > >I want to recommend that we keep our people directory flat but if groups >have a maximum of >5000 users, this will be an obstacle. Would anyone care to comment? > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Gil Kirkpatrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 11:49 AM >To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' >Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory Limitations > >Eoin, > >Actually the size of the directory itself doesn't really affect >replication traffic (except when you bring up a new domain controller). >Its the amount of data that is changed, and how frequently it is changed, >that drives the replication traffic. > >-gil >-----Original Message----- >From: T Bowman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 9:04 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory Limitations > >Eoin, > I do not believe there is a hard limit. I do know it is capable of > handling millions of objects. >However, keep in mind that the size will affect replication and thus your >network. > >T. >----------------------- >Tony Bowman, MCSE, MCSA, CCNA >Harvest, AL >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Eoin Mooney >Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 10:48 AM >To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' >Subject: [ActiveDir] Active Directory Limitations > >Hi all, > >I know this is probably a very general question , but is there a limit >with relation to active directory size. >Number of folders created , data stored ,etc,etc > >Regards > >Eoin List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
