RE: [ActiveDir] 2003 NTDS.DIT size

[Bernard, Aric]

Title: Message

A number of things are different in the storage of data in the Windows Server 2003 DIT.  The most relevant is that the database now uses a single instance store for security descriptors, therefore the application of ACEs to directory object often require less directory space.  In HP’s case, the single instance store and the deletion of distributed link tracking objects freed a significant amount of directory space.  However the actual reduction in DIT size is not actually realized until the DIT undergoes an offline defrag.  Of course the reduction is also seen on newly promoted DCs.   Aric   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 5:51 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] 2003 NTDS.DIT size   I blame it on cold water. Oh, you don't mean that shrinkage.   From what I understand, its due to improvements in the database format and how data is stored within. I'm guessing that they've rearranged the table structures to better fit the actual usage patterns.   Roger -------------------------------------------------------------- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Joe Baguley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 8:40 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] 2003 NTDS.DIT size DIT size decreases are certainly what I am seeing in the field, with an 80,000 user AD I deal with shrinking in a similar fashion to the Compaq/HP one described below...   Surely some people on here will be able to explain the shrinkage....   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad Sent: 15 January 2004 13:19 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] 2003 NTDS.DIT size   According to Tony Redmond's Exchange 2003 book, the HP/Compaq combined DIT file was 12GB in AD on Win2k and dropped to 7GB under 2003. Not sure how typical that is.   I'd think worst case you'd end up about the same place you are now. IIRC, there aren't that many schema changes, so the structural size shouldn't change that much.   Roger -------------------------------------------------------------- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Parker, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 8:03 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ActiveDir] 2003 NTDS.DIT size All,   We have 53,000 user AD environment.  The current size of the NTDS.DIT is just under 2GB.   I am reading Chapter 9 of the 2003 planning document and on page 368 it states:   "On the drive that will contain the Active Directory database, NTDS.dit, provide 0.4 gigabytes (GB)  of storage for each 1,000 users.  ..."     Now, if this is true, that is saying when I upgrade to 2003, my database will grow from 2GB to 21GB.   This seems a little hard to believe.  We are going to be doing this in the lab shortly, but we are planning additional hardware, and this seems a little "off".     Can anyone confirm this?