On 2011-05-19 at 11:23 -0400, Evan Pettrey wrote: > I've managed to get my manager on board with this and I am fairly certain > the other sys admin will be on board as well. However, I am certain there > will be backlash from the end users. Many of the guys in our NOCs (we are a > telecomm) have inboxes in excess of 100,000 emails and they continue to grow > larger by the day. Telling them they are going to have to manage their > inboxes so as not to exceed a certain size is going to be a challenge, but > it is absolutely necessary. > > My questions are: > > * What specific quota sizes should I put in place? From what I've read
Since your biggest problem is political, part of the answer is political: "At least as large as Gmail's current quota." If you don't manage to match that, prepare for a lot of snark. Currently that means "7584 GB" (when I check). Note that if you actually start using near that much capacity in Gmail, you're likely to start noticing performance issues. If you can afford it, my backseat design advice is: have a system with quotas and a system without, and have a self-service option to move between them (rate-limited). Put a lot of work into making the quota-based system perform well. Most people will go for the reliably performing system, and perhaps some of the 100k mail people will actually be happy being left on a slower system, as long as they get to keep the mail. (Of course, I've not admin'd Exchange and have no idea what it would cost, so that's +1 flake for me) -Phil _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
