These may be of some help http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/01/15/432207.aspx http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc500980.aspx
We do not limit what can be sent and received as it gets in the way of the business. More importantly, we have never had a reason to limit it. We do limit mailbox size and limit send only when the mailbox limit is reached. Our authorative repositories of information do not include exchange and mail messages of company value are to be stored off exchange, hence the reason for mailbox limits. I see no issue with moving to vmware and san,(we are also considering this) SAN vs DAS, like anything there will be a trade off and so long as you are clear about the risks and benefits in doing both. One thing about the technet article is that they never appeared to consider putting the clusters active nodes on one san and the passives on another san, thus helping to eliminate their concerns. I am considering using SCR between two SANs in physically different towns as part of a DRP -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Hutchings Sent: Monday, 26 May 2008 22:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Nearly Full Exchange Server/Virtualization Help At the current rate of usage, I reckon I have around 3 months until our single Exchange 2003 SP2 Enterprise server is full. Adding more disk capacity isn't an option as there are no more drive bays, plus the box is due to be replaced in around six months so it's not viable to be throwing money at it now. We do have a 2 server ESX cluster sat on a Clariion AX4 FC SAN. Our userbase is diverse, people like to horde and never delete/archive, and I haven't helped us by not having any hard mailbox or message size limits. My rough plan for when the box was due for renewal was to virtualize anyway, and also to add a third box to the cluster. As I see it, one plan to deal with the imminent problem would be to buy some 15k spindles for the SAN and possibly a little more RAM for the ESX hosts and move Exchange onto it, job done, end of story. I'd also like to implement maximum message size limits both internally and externally, whatever you choose someone won't be happy, and my initial thoughts are that 25mb seems a figure where anything larger and you should probably be looking at an alternative means of sending. We have around 400 users and 190gb of mail (140/50 private/public store split) in a single Storage Group. Appreciate any feedback/thoughts/opinions etc. -- MIRA Ltd Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England. Registered in England and Wales No. 402570 VAT Registration GB 114 5409 96 ********************************************************************** Have you clicked on yet? www.nrc.govt.nz ********************************************************************** NORTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL 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. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] ********************************************************************** _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/read/?forum=exchange To subscribe: http://e-newsletters.internet.com/discussionlists.html/ To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
