Nope, don't have that one installed. The blanks I have been seeing are limited to this list of all of the lists I am on.
-- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 4:41 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT: Blank messages to lists??? Okay dumb questions to folks.. E-Bitz - SBS MVP the Official Blog of the SBS "Diva" : OWA fix on Microsoft Update: http://msmvps.com/blogs/bradley/archive/2006/04/28/92884.aspx Are the folks that are sending blank emails .. have you deployed 911829? Kevin Gent wrote: > i'm seeing lots of blanks over the past week > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Douglas M. Long" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 4:05 PM > Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Blank messages to lists??? > > > Anyone else receiving blank emails? The reply from Al (below Susans > email) and a couple of others I have got over the past couple of days > have had empty bodies. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan > Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP] > Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 2:53 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Optimize Exchange Pagefile > > Word of advice -- put "SBS" in the subject line and you'll get > SBSlady from the get go :-) > > "By design" SBS is maxed at 75 users/devices. > > As you have already stated....do not do a /3GB (let me repeat that > again) DO NOT do a /3GB on a SBS box. It's not necessary and doesn't > impact a thing. > > Remember with SP2 we now have 75 gigs to play with so plan accordingly > (and no snickers from the terrabyte people) > > SBS is pretty tuned as it is.. set your page files to be 1.5 and I > have mine spread on two drives. What is more important is the layout > of those partitions..and boy... did a recent blog post bring out a lot > of comments > http://msmvps.com/blogs/bradley/archive/2006/05/02/93249.aspx > > Set the crash dump to minidump or even full dump... when that sucker > blows (and it's not that often and kinda fun when it does as you can > use the debugger tool) you want that dumpfile to be there and juicy. > > Exchange 'by design' will suck down the memory and release when needed. > Honestly Exchange ..while being a hog.. isn't the annoyance on my > boxes.. it's MSDE that is the troublesome child. > > After applications of SP1 (if it is not integrated that is) you need > to rerun the SBS monitoring wizard to get rid of a bogus STORE memory alert. > > Now then.. about that MSDE. > > The SBS health monitor function is set to warn you with an allocated > memory alert when the use is above 2 gigs..when you have a 4 gig > box..that 2 gig limit is a bit stupid. So step one is to monitor your > box.. see where it hovers at. I bumped mine up a bit. > > Next... the problem children. ISA running on MSDE 'by design' will be > like Exchange and suck up all RAM and release when needed... sorry ISA > .. you don't need to do that (and before Joe has the inevitable heart > attack of a firewall on my DC.. it's in all honesty my 'second' > firewall as I have a hardware one in front..but I like the monitoring > and with Dana Epp's Scorpion Software Firewall dashboard tool, the GUI > pie charts of the firewall hits that 'do' hit my domain controller are > way cool....I know, I know... it's the GUI..just shake your head and > walk away). > > SBSMonitoring 'can' and 'has' on my box and others in the community > gotten too 'hot' on my box as well. So for both ISA and SBSmonitoring > there's a command (yes Joe, I did command line) to stomp on those msde > instances and make them behave > > http://msmvps.com/blogs/bradley/search.aspx?q=allocated+memory&p=1 > > This is the ISA > http://msmvps.com/blogs/bradley/archive/2005/05/22/48500.aspx > > This is SBS montoring > http://msmvps.com/blogs/bradley/archive/2005/02/04/34984.aspx > > So for memory optimization... forget about Exchange.. it behaves.. but > be prepared to stomp on those MSDE's > > ...and we're using a lot of RAID 5's down here (and even SATA drives) > > Al Mulnick wrote: > >> yeah, there would be some general disagreement from me. Why? Only >> because this is SBS box vs. an enterprise Exchange server hosting 5K >> users. >> >> My laptop (crud that it is) could host 20 heavy exchange users with >> usable/good performance with that amount of memory. I don't think >> the focus of a machine that will only ever have <75 users should be >> optimized for more than space in most situations. It would be a >> waste of money that could be spent on other things like better >> backups, better coffee, etc. >> >> I don't believe there's any value in buying a system such as SBS and >> then having to make adjustments to things like pagefile size. That's >> counter to the product's reason for being. >> >> Saying that, Dave is correct that optimizing the disk layout has the >> biggest benefit, but it's SBS and as such it's "special". Just ask >> SBS-Lady ;) >> >> Al >> >> On 5/4/06, Dave Wade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> If you have 4gig of RAM then you should get minimal paging. (I know >>> this is a great generalization) >>> >>> 1) Log file access is sequential, database is random >>> 2) Keeping Log files write queue down is key to performance >>> 3) log files are write only >>> 4) raid-5 tends to have poor write performance (again greate >>> generalization). >>> >>> So I would try and get another drive in the box so I could have a >>> mirrored pair for OS & LOGS, and a mirrored pair for Databases. . >>> Putting these on seperate drives will do far more for performance >>> than changing the page file. RAID-5 is a real bad performer on write. >>> These days I woudl avoid as far as possible... >>> >>> I am sure other folks may disagree... >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Dan >>> DeStefano >>> Sent: Thu 04/05/2006 21:36 >>> To: [email protected] >>> Cc: >>> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Optimize Exchange Pagefile >>> >>> >>> >>> Yes, far less than 100, on this box it is under 20. >>> >>> You do not think it is necessary to mess with the page file, >>> even if only to make it static? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _____ >>> >>> >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Wade >>> Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 4:06 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Optimize Exchange Pagefile >>> >>> >>> >>> There is no point in messing about with memory config if you >>> only have a three drive RAID 5 array. Disk config is critical. How >>> many users do you want to put on this box. less than 100? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Dan >>> DeStefano >>> Sent: Thu 04/05/2006 20:16 >>> To: [email protected] >>> Cc: >>> Subject: [ActiveDir] Optimize Exchange Pagefile >>> >>> I was wondering if anyone can point me to any MS >>> document that discusses optimizing the page file on an Exchange box. >>> I found http://support.microsoft.com/kb/815372, but this article >>> does not discuss the page file. I am running SBS 2003 on a 3 GHZ >>> Xeon with 4GB physical memory and a 3-disk RAID5 array with 2 >>> logical drives. I plan on installing the Exchange binaries on the >>> first logical drive (which will also contain the system and boot >>> partitions) and the Exchange databases, logs, queues, etc on the second >>> logical drive. >>> >>> >>> >>> The way I normally set the pagefile on my systems is >>> to set it to be static and 1.5x physical RAM. I also create a >>> pagefile on each disk and let Windows choose the best one (which >>> will be the second logical drive). I do not want to disable the >>> pagefile on C: because, from what I understand, this will disable >>> crash dumps, which I do not want. However, I set the crash dump to >>> kernel only, not the entire pagefile. That being said, would it be >>> appropriate to set the pagefile on C: to something small like 256MB >>> since the OS will be using the one on the second drive anyway? >>> >>> >>> >>> Also, other than not using the /3GB switch, are there >>> any other differences between the memory/pagefile settings on a >>> regular Exchange box running WS2k3 and the SBS2k3 version? >>> >>> >>> >>> I would appreciate any guidance. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Dan DeStefano >>> >>> Info-lution Corporation >>> >>> www.info-lution.com >>> >>> MCSE - 2073750 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ******************************************************************** >>> ** >>> >>> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential >>> and >>> >>> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to >>> whom they >>> >>> are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required >>> to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of >>> Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one >>> of the exemptions in the Act. >>> >>> If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport >>> e-Services via [EMAIL PROTECTED] and then permanently >>> remove it from your system. >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> http://www.stockport.gov.uk >>> >>> >>> ******************************************************************** >>> ** >>> >>> Dan DeStefano >>> Info-lution Corporation >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> http://www.info-lution.com <http://www.info-lution.com/> >>> Office: 727 546-9143 >>> FAX: 727 541-5888 >>> >>> If you have received this message in error please notify the sender, >>> disregard any content and remove it from your possession. >>> >>> >>> >>> Dan DeStefano >>> Info-lution Corporation >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> http://www.info-lution.com <http://www.info-lution.com/> >>> Office: 727 546-9143 >>> FAX: 727 541-5888 >>> >>> If you have received this message in error please notify the sender, >>> disregard any content and remove it from your possession. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> .+- w i 0 - + ֬ @Bm + v* ˊ E ֫r zm >> V r y & - 4 i b b /=== > > > -- Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days? http://www.threatcode.com List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
