-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Anderson
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 4:03 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies
Susan,
How did you do that I would love to be able to reboot
with a worry.
Bob
IT Guy
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Susan Bradley,
CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 3:04 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies
And on my DC I removed the USB drive as a boot device.
So now I can be at home in my jammies and remotely reboot the server
with no issues and it will reboot just fine.
Bob Anderson wrote:
> Laura,
> Yea that on bit me big time. Had our Domain Controller running
and
> added a USB Drive all was fine. Along came Microsoft with
the darned
> Updates and there 'Computer Must be restarted' Well it restarted
> alright and would not reboot. Talked to IBM Server Support for 4
> hours be for I finally figured it out myself. That was the
only time
> I ever taught something to them and not the other way around.
>
> I have since update the restart procedure to say 'Power off the USB
> drive before the system restarts.'
>
>
> Bob
> IT Guy
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura A.
> Robinson
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 11:41 AM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies
>
> Umm, that was kinda the point I was trying to make, Bob. :-)
>
> Laura
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Bob Anderson
>> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 11:09 AM
>> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies
>>
>> Laura,
>> It doesn't matter what the boot order is. Most servers have an
>> internal Raid configuration that doesn't kick in until after the
>> machine goes through it's start up and by them it has
found the USB
>> and not the hard disks.
>>
>> And yes I have this on two of my servers.
>>
>> Bob Anderson
>> IT Guy
>> Kent Sporting Goods
>> 433 Park Ave. S
>> New London OH 44851
>> 419-929-7021 x315
>> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura A.
>> Robinson
>> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 10:52 AM
>> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies
>>
>> What's the boot order in the BIOS on those machines?
>>
>> Laura
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Albert Duro
>>> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 10:54 AM
>>> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>>> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies
>>>
>>> Ah, that brings up another interesting point. I use USB
>>>
>> external hard
>>
>>
>>> drives too, and I've found that some WinXP and
>>> Server2003 machines will not boot if a USB hard drive is
>>>
>> attached--I
>>
>>> have to remember to turn it off while booting.
>>> Anyone else seen this?
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]"
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> To: <ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 9:02 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies (was) Exchange
>>>
>> Log files
>>
>>> --Disk
>>> Full--
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> No tape drives here. If it has a USB connection we are
>>>>
>> in business.
>>
>>>> Albert Duro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes, BE does do disk backup. But I have some objections:
>>>>> A. They don't make it easy, infact they make an unnecessarily
>>>>> complicated production of it.
>>>>> B. I started doing NTBackup to disk while (and because)
>>>>>
>>> I was still
>>>
>>>>> troubleshooting BE. When I gave up on BE and its
>>>>>
>>> brethren, NTBackup
>>>
>>>>> was a natural segway, and already in place and working.
>>>>> C. I discovered one great advantage that
>>>>>
>>> NTBackup-to-disk has over
>>>
>>>>> any other backup system: with a bit of planning, it is
>>>>>
>>> proof against
>>>
>>>>> almost any combination of crash and burn. You have a
>>>>>
>>> backup file on
>>>
>>>>> two or more disks/machines. Things go bad, you can do
>>>>>
>>> recovery from
>>>
>>>>> any Windows machine; you can move or copy the backup
>>>>>
>>> disks/files to
>>>
>>>>> any machine. Try doing that with a sophisticated tape-based or
>>>>> SAN-based system. Imagine having to replace the tape
>>>>> drive/autoloader with the exact same type, while rebuilding a
>>>>> same-hardware three-year old server to the exact same
>>>>>
>>> configuration,
>>>
>>>>> same SPs, same backup software, same drivers. I can
>>>>>
>>> guarantee that
>>>
>>>>> at least one of those necessary replacement elements will be
>>>>> impossible to find, even under leisurely conditions. [1]
>>>>>
>>> Yes, there
>>>
>>>>> are strategies to deal with that, but if you could spend
>>>>>
>>> that kind of
>>>
>>>>> money, you would have gotten a double-redundant
>>>>>
>>> bullet-proof system in the first place.
>>>
>>>>> I truly hope that I'm wrong out of lack of knowledge and
>>>>>
>>> pessimism.
>>>
>>>>> I am open to being corrected and encouraged.
>>>>> [1] Naturally, the tape drive drivers will be on the same
>>>>>
>>> tape that
>>>
>>>>> you can't access nohow. Download the drivers from the
>>>>>
>>> OEM, you say?
>>>
>>>>> Chances are excellent that the OEM has gone out of
>>>>>
>>> business, or sold
>>>
>>>>> out to a giant who prunes out what they don't like (and
>>>>>
>> what you
>>
>>>>> need), or changed the name or version number on it out of sheer
>>>>> orneryness. If you do get to what looks like the right
drivers,
>>>>> you're likely to find that the last minor upgrade version
>>>>>
>>> that really
>>>
>>>>> worked well for you has been dropped, or tweaked into
>>>>>
>> your trouble
>>
>>>>> zone. I can testify to ALL these experiences. I think
>>>>>
>>> others can too.
>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* Al Mulnick <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>>>>> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>
>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, November 02, 2006 3:27 PM
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies (was)
>>>>>
>>> Exchange Log
>>>
>>>>> files --Disk Full--
>>>>>
>>>>> Trying to remember exactly, but doesn't BE have an
>>>>>
>>> option to use
>>>
>>>>> disk vs. tape drives?
>>>>>
>>>>> You *could* run a test to help simplify and rule out
>>>>>
>>> some of the
>>>
>>>>> complexity. Could take a while, but might be worth it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Al
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/2/06, *Albert Duro* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Why does NTBackup work for me and BE not, when
>>>>>
>> they are at
>>
>>>>> core the same product?
>>>>> I wondered about that too. Here are my thoughts.
>>>>> First, NTBackup is a simpler product that doesn't
>>>>>
>>> get tangled
>>>
>>>>> up with the complexities of scheduling and a GUI.
>>>>> But the real reason, I think, is that I've been doing
>>>>> NTBackups to disk, while BE was to tape.
>>>>> I've always suspected that most, if not all of my
>>>>>
>>> difficulties
>>>
>>>>> with BE had to do with the drivers for the tape
>>>>>
>> drives and
>>
>>>>> autoloaders, and with the SCSI interface to
other devices
>>>>> ('other' being anything beyond the normal HD and CD
>>>>> complement)
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> *From:* Al Mulnick <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>>>>> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>
>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 01, 2006 6:11 AM
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] Exchange Log files --Disk
>>>>> Full--
>>>>>
>>>>> Well put Albert. Thanks for that feedback.
>>>>> What still has me curious is why BE wouldn't
>>>>>
>>> work in your
>>>
>>>>> environment and why ntbackup does (partially
>>>>>
>>> at least).
>>>
>>>>> ntbackup as written by the same exact people and has a lot
>>>>> of the same code (it's licensed by Microsoft
>>>>>
>>> from Seagate
>>>
>>>>> last I checked). Ntbackup is the less
>>>>>
>> featured version
>>
>>>>> designed for single host backups and extended
>>>>>
>>> to act like
>>>
>>>>> it does more.
>>>>>
>>>>> So that said, I agree that the goal is that
>>>>>
>>> your client's
>>>
>>>>> data is backed up. I have to say that I
>>>>>
>> disagree that
>>
>>>>> jury-rigs, mickey mouse and by the seat of
>>>>>
>>> your pants is
>>>
>>>>> the long term solution though. That's an
>>>>>
>>> infrastructure
>>>
>>>>> component that will come back to haunt at some
>>>>>
>>> point down
>>>
>>>>> the road. As an interim fix, of course it can
>>>>>
>>> work. I'm
>>>
>>>>> not blinded by the big vendors to the point
>>>>>
>>> that I think
>>>
>>>>> they have the only solution. Far from it.
>>>>>
>>> But I like to
>>>
>>>>> think that I can at least share some perspective and
>>>>> experience related to where it leads and I
definitely
>>>>> favor technology over layer8 processes.
Why? Because
>>>>> layer8 changes and grows out of current
positions and
>>>>> foundational solutions should not have to be
>>>>>
>> decimated
>>
>>>>> when that happens. I've seen that way too
>>>>>
>>> often to care
>>>
>>>>> to see it continue where possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Basically, I hate to see a foundational
>>>>>
>>> solution such as
>>>
>>>>> backup, rely on such complexity and human
>>>>>
>>> intervention. I
>>>
>>>>> completely understand that you have to do what
>>>>>
>>> you have to
>>>
>>>>> do. When you wrote it in your original email,
>>>>>
>>> it sounded
>>>
>>>>> like you approved of that method. Reading
>>>>>
>>> this last one,
>>>
>>>>> I can you don't. I was just trying to point
>>>>>
>> out where
>>
>>>>> that leads and trying to understand how you go
>>>>>
>>> there. I
>>>
>>>>> bet I would have gotten there the same way
you did ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> Best of luck getting that worked out.
>>>>> If you need anything from me, please don't
>>>>>
>> hesitate. I
>>
>>>>> have been known to make some backup
>>>>>
>> solutions work :)
>>
>>>>> Feel free to ping off-line if I can be of any help.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/31/06, *Albert Duro* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Al, since you ask, no I don't see it
>>>>>
>>> differently, at
>>>
>>>>> least not at the oratorical level. But
where the
>>>>> rubber meets the road, things can look
>>>>>
>>> very different.
>>>
>>>>> Like the military say, the best laid plan
>>>>>
>>> falls apart
>>>
>>>>> the moment it meets the enemy. You
assume that I
>>>>> monkey around with Ntbackup and balky media for
>>>>> economic reasons. In fact, we spared no expense
>>>>> (relative to our small size) to put in
>>>>> industrial-strength backup systems, both
>>>>>
>>> software and
>>>
>>>>> hardware. Even paid consultants to set
it up and
>>>>> manage it.
>>>>> It blew up in our faces. Primarily
>>>>>
>> because Backup
>>
>>>>> Exec just wouldn't work right in our
>>>>>
>> environment.
>>
>>>>> (I'm not saying that BE isn't a fine product, it would
>>>>> just never work for us). Why not?
>>>>>
>> Don't know -- I
>>
>>>>> couldn't figure it out. Our
consultants couldn't
>>>>> figure it out. Veritas support couldn't
>>>>>
>>> either, nor
>>>
>>>>> the autoloader manufacturer. For more
>>>>>
>>> than two years,
>>>
>>>>> nobody could figure it out, until I
>>>>>
>> decided to stop
>>
>>>>> throwing good money after bad.
>>>>> Did I try alternative products? In the
>>>>>
>> same class,
>>
>>>>> yes -- more tales of woe, but different
>>>>>
>>> reasons. We
>>>
>>>>> did not nor are we going to buy the
>>>>>
>>> high-end systems,
>>>
>>>>> which cost more than our whole network is worth.
>>>>> So I was left with NTBackup, and admittedly a
>>>>> little more gun-shyness about brand-name backup
>>>>> products than is strictly rational.
>>>>>
>> That's what I
>>
>>>>> have to work with, and I try to make the
>>>>>
>>> best of it.
>>>
>>>>> That's the 'real world' in my little corner of it.
>>>>> Believe me, when you and joe and others on
>>>>>
>>> this list
>>>
>>>>> urge us to 'make the best', I listen, I
>>>>>
>>> learn, and I
>>>
>>>>> applaud. And it does push me in that
>>>>>
>>> direction. But
>>>
>>>>> the only path there goes through 'make
>>>>>
>> the best of
>>
>>>>> what you've got'. It's bumpy and often
>>>>>
>> barricaded.
>>
>>>>> But after all is said and done, the REAL
>>>>>
>>> point is that
>>>
>>>>> I am preserving my clients' data and
keeping them
>>>>> happy. Jury-rigs, mickey mouse, and
>>>>>
>>> by-the-pants not
>>>
>>>>> withstanding.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Original Message -----
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* Al Mulnick
>>>>>
>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>>>> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>>>>> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>
>>>>> *Sent:* Sunday, October 29, 2006 4:30 AM
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] Exchange
Log files
>>>>> --Disk Full--
>>>>>
>>>>> sub-optimal media are part of the
real world?
>>>>> Wow, thanks :)
>>>>> Truth be told, that's a rant of mine.
>>>>>
>>> I've heard
>>>
>>>>> a lot (lately especially) about how we
>>>>>
>>> want to do
>>>
>>>>> things cheap and inexpensive and
we'll fix it
>>>>> later and so on. I've also spent a
>>>>>
>>> great deal of
>>>
>>>>> time cleaning up that kind of stuff.
>>>>> Unfortunately, once it escapes into the "real
>>>>> world" then it becomes more difficult
>>>>>
>>> to clean up
>>>
>>>>> because you have to do so in front of
>>>>> customers/clients.
>>>>> Interesting approach though. Usually a less
>>>>> disciplined from what I've seen and
>>>>>
>>> often results
>>>
>>>>> in more expense related to downtime and
>>>>> troubleshooting and lack of service. I'm
>>>>> interested if you see differently though.
>>>>> This area of the business fascinates me....
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/28/06, *Albert Duro*
>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sure you and Susan are
>>>>>
>> right. All I'm
>>
>>>>> saying is that it *can* happen,
>>>>>
>> and for me,
>>
>>>>> why take the chance when
>>>>>
>>> one-job/one-task is
>>>
>>>>> easy to do.
>>>>> Good point about the media, and that may
>>>>> explain my case, but, hey,
>>>>>
>>> sub-optimal media
>>>
>>>>> situations are part of the real world.
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> *From:* Al Mulnick
>>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>>>>>
<mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>
>>>>> *Sent:* Saturday, October 28,
>>>>>
>>> 2006 6:33 AM
>>>
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir]
>>>>>
>> Exchange Log
>>
>>>>> files --Disk Full--
>>>>>
>>>>> I've not had that same experience.
>>>>> Granted, it's a limited feature utility
>>>>> (note the use of the word
>>>>>
>>> utility vs. tool
>>>
>>>>> as requested) but it's still
>>>>>
>> capable of
>>
>>>>> doing more. There were
some fixes to
>>>>> ntbackup in service packs and
>>>>>
>>> such. You
>>>
>>>>> might want to verify you're
using the
>>>>> latest version of that's
>>>>>
>> what you see.
>>
>>>>> Also, check the media it's
>>>>>
>> headed to.
>>
>>>>> It's error handling is not very elegant,
>>>>> but I've found it to be useful
>>>>>
>>> and strong
>>>
>>>>> enough to stand up to some
>>>>>
>>> complex tasks
>>>
>>>>> in the past. I've got several
>>>>>
>>> running now
>>>
>>>>> via cli that have been in
>>>>>
>>> place for more
>>>
>>>>> than half a year without issue
>>>>>
>>> (I know, I
>>>
>>>>> know, spend all that money on an
>>>>> enterprise backup system
>>>>>
>> only to backup
>>
>>>>> some machines locally. But
there are
>>>>> times when it makes more
>>>>>
>>> sense, trust me.)
>>>
>>>>> -ajm
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/27/06, *Albert Duro*
>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I've found, with NTbackup,
>>>>>
>>> that if you
>>>
>>>>> cram two or more tasks
>>>>>
>>> into a backup
>>>
>>>>> job, it's very likely to
>>>>>
>> fail. For
>>
>>>>> example, if you do a
>>>>>
>>> System State and
>>>
>>>>> a file backup and an
>>>>>
>>> Exchange backup
>>>
>>>>> in the same job. It's best to
>>>>> separate each task into
>>>>>
>>> its own job,
>>>
>>>>> and sort it out in the
>>>>>
>> scheduling.
>>
>>>>> A mixed job will also work
>>>>>
>>> for a while
>>>
>>>>> and then fail, which
>>>>>
>>> sounds like what
>>>
>>>>> happened to OP.
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> *From:* Wells, James Arthur
>>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> *To:*
>>>>>
>>> ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>
>>>
>>>>> *Cc:* Technical Support
>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday,
>>>>>
>>> October 26, 2006
>>>
>>>>> 2:21 PM
>>>>> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir]
>>>>> Exchange Log files
>>>>>
>>> --Disk Full--
>>>
>>>>> Do you have multiple
>>>>>
>>> information
>>>
>>>>> stores on this
>>>>>
>> storage group?
>>
>>>>> (If using Exchange Enterprise
>>>>> edition)...the logs
>>>>>
>> can't flush
>>
>>>>> until all stores have a full
>>>>> backup, because the logs are
>>>>> shared...
>>>>> --James
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----------
>>>
>>>>> *From:*
>>>>>
>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> [mailto:
>>>>>
>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>>>>> *On Behalf Of
>>>>>
>>> *Technical Support
>>>
>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday,
>>>>>
>>> October 26, 2006
>>>
>>>>> 3:16 PM
>>>>> *To:*
>>>>> ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>;
>>>>> ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>
>>>
>>>>> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir]
>>>>> Exchange Log files
>>>>>
>>> --Disk Full--
>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> I am running Normal
>>>>>
>>> Backup. Using
>>>
>>>>> NTBackup Utility. Backing up
>>>>> Information store.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----------
>>>
>>>>> *From:*
>>>>>
>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> on behalf of Missy Koslosky
>>>>> *Sent:* Thu
>>>>>
>> 10/26/2006 12:49 PM
>>
>>>>> *To:*
>>>>>
>>> ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>
>>>
>>>>> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir]
>>>>> Exchange Log files
>>>>>
>>> --Disk Full--
>>>
>>>>> Are you running full
>>>>>
>>> (AKA normal)
>>>
>>>>> backups every night?
>>>>>
>>> It seems not.
>>>
>>>>> Use NTBackup to
>>>>>
>> backup to disk
>>
>>>>> (obviously, you'll
>>>>>
>> need a disk
>>
>>>>> with over 120GB of available
>>>>> space) and then use whatever
>>>>> normal program you
>>>>>
>> use to back
>>
>>>>> that backup onto tape.
>>>>>
>>> This will
>>>
>>>>> keep you running
>>>>>
>> until you sort
>>
>>>>> out why your normal backup
>>>>> software isn't
>>>>>
>>> flushing the logs
>>>
>>>>> when the backup completes.
>>>>> How are you
>>>>>
>> currently running
>>
>>>>> backups? What software
>>>>>
>>> is in use?
>>>
>>>>> Are you sure it's
>>>>>
>>> Exchange aware?
>>>
>>>>> Are you doing brick
>>>>>
>>> level backups
>>>
>>>>> or copy backups
>>>>>
>>> instead of a full
>>>
>>>>> backup? Neither will
>>>>>
>>> flush the logs.
>>>
>>>>> I'd resolve this as
>>>>>
>> quickly as
>>
>>>>> possible, because if
>>>>>
>>> you are in a
>>>
>>>>> situation where you
>>>>>
>>> have to replay
>>>
>>>>> the logs, you're NOT
>>>>>
>>> going to be a
>>>
>>>>> happy camper.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----------
>>>
>>>>> *From:*
>>>>>
>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> [mailto:
>>>>>
>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>>>>> *On Behalf Of
>>>>>
>>> *Technical Support
>>>
>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday,
>>>>>
>>> October 26, 2006
>>>
>>>>> 11:09 AM
>>>>> *To:*
>>>>>
>>> ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>
>>>
>>>>> *Subject:*
>>>>>
>> [ActiveDir] Exchange
>>
>>>>> Log files --Disk Full--
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>> Kindly suggest,
>>>>>
>> what i can do
>>
>>>>> about my Exchange Log files?
>>>>> I have about 120 GB
>>>>>
>>> Log files for
>>>
>>>>> past 4 months. I have
>>>>>
>>> a few doubts:-
>>>
>>>>> Do i really need all
>>>>>
>>> those log
>>>
>>>>> files?
>>>>> If yes, Then how is it
>>>>>
>>> possible to
>>>
>>>>> manage with this as i
>>>>>
>>> have a very
>>>
>>>>> limited space left.
>>>>> Can i delete these
log files?
>>>>> Backup doesnt remove
>>>>>
>>> these log files?
>>>
>>>>> i am really running
>>>>>
>>> out of space
>>>
>>>>> on my Exchange log
>>>>>
>>> storage drive.
>>>
>>>>> *Thanks!!!*
>>>>> Ravi
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
>>>> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
>>>> List archive:
>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.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@mail.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@mail.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@mail.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@mail.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@mail.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@mail.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@mail.activedir.org/
