Dunno about Entourage at all, but Outlook provided for an "archive" .pst file 
as well as the active .pst file.  Then one would keep the active .pst file 
small and back it up often, but back up the archive .pst file only after an 
archive process had been run (say once a week or whatever).  One could even 
keep more than one archive .pst file, so that they didn't get "too big" as 
well.  Say, start a new archive .pst file at the beginning of a new calendar 
year.  The archive .pst file was created manually on one of the Outlook menus, 
and then would appear as additional mailboxes in the left pane of the outlook 
dialog.  Individual messages were moved to the archive .pst file by 
drag/dropping them from a mailbox in the active .pst file to a mailbox in the 
archive .pst file.

Fred Holmes

At 10:47 AM 11/6/2008, Tom Piwowar wrote:
>The problem is backing up Entourage email files. Heavy email users will 
>often have an MS Entourage database file that is 2 to 6 GB in size. 
>(Entourage stores everything in one huge file.)
>
>The Entourage database file will change with every arriving email. If 
>Entourage is set to check for mail every 5 minutes the Entourage database 
>file will change 12 times an hour. 
>
>Apple's Time Machine runs hourly. It does incremental backups at the file 
>level. It won't backup just the part of a large file that changed.
>
>If TimeMachine's hourly run tries to back up a file this large to a 
>network volume the copy time will exceed 5 minutes. So the file is 
>changing faster than the Time Machine backup can copy it.
>
>So how to backup an MS Entourage database file?
>
>I read someplace that a recent Apple update supports Time Machine 
>incremental backups at the sub-file level, but now I can't find that info 
>anywhere. Was I just dreaming?
>
>If I setup a separate backup program just for the Entourage database 
>file, a backup to a network volume will slow down the client computer for 
>5 to 20 minutes. Having a bunch of these running will add a significant 
>load on the server. So this is not a good option either.
>
>Any ideas? (Yes, now it is my turn to say that suggestions to "dump 
>Microsoft" are not an option.)
>
>
>*************************************************************************
>**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
>**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
>*************************************************************************


*************************************************************************
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*************************************************************************

Reply via email to