Hi Jeff- I was curious what you meant by the statement- ""Also, removing the ADM templates from all but the PDCE, we went from a SYSVOL of 378mb to 78mb :)""
So I looked around and found 813338 - How to Minimize SYSVOL Size by Removing Administrative Templates which I was previously completely unaware of :-0 Is that the procedure you followed and any caveats you would care to share? I'm also curious if there was any reasoning behind doing that outside what is spelled out it 813338? TIA Bob Free Sr Network Specialist PG&E Auburn, Ca. -----Original Message----- From: Jef Kazimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 16, 2004 8:49 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] 2003 NTDS.DIT size If anything, We just did a 2003 upgrade of our DIT with live data in the lab. We did an upgrade of 2003, and then Compact in NTDSUTIL in 2 seperate domains: Went from 2.68gig to 1.1gb Went from 1.0gb to 890mb Also, removing the ADM templates from all but the PDCE, we went from a SYSVOL of 378mb to 78mb :) We still have morphs to clean up, but the process we have working in lab looks very promising. :) J Original Message: >From: "joe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] 2003 NTDS.DIT size >Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 20:51:28 -0500 >You probably should actually see a decrease in size simply from the new ACL >storage alone. > >It is easy enough to prove out in the lab though. The doc doesn't know what >kind of data you specifically are storing, it is making some assumptions >that may not be valid for you. > > > joe > > > _____ > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Parker, Edward >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? > > 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/ 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/
