Yes, and every restore seems to be like the turn-back-in-time thingy from the third book :( I'm really wondering what will happen the first time I'll need to restore something replicated. Most probably a big eruption, but not exactly of lava :-). I'd better start documentating possible problems and need for testing NOW. On the other hand, after a brown eruption of that kind possibly I could finally get resources (most notably, time) for a *decent* testing environment.
Heiko -- -- PREVINET S.p.A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Via Ferretto, 1 ph x39-041-5907073 -- I-31021 Mogliano V.to (TV) fax x39-041-5907087 -- ITALY >-----Original Message----- >From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 4:34 AM >To: Exchange Discussions >Subject: RE: (stupid?) directory replication question > > >You're not alone. This public folder replication stuff is >like the Hogwarts >curriculum. > >Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP >Tech Consultant >Compaq Computer Corporation (soon to be HP) >All your base are belong to us. > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Herold Heiko >Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 1:41 AM >To: Exchange Discussions >Subject: RE: (stupid?) directory replication question > > >Oh. >In this moment all visible (255/750) in folder replication >status on the >old server are "local modified", while those visible on the destination >server ((41/750) all are "in sync". >I'm starting to wonder, since those are live folders, where both users >work and incoming mail is routed, could this be just due to new changes >applied continously, never permitting a complete quiescent state ? > >I still lack to understand how exchange works in this case - I suppose >once the whole "old" content has replicated, the new arriving content >from outside is queued for both (all) servers containing a replica >(knowing which ones from directory replication), so it would not be a >problem removing the "old" instance if the old content has been >replicated. > >However if I understand it correctly exchange users always use the >instance on their local server (performance optimization) - this means >any user who's mailbox is on the old server does work on the instance >hosted in the old server. >Now, if I remove that replica, just a moment after a change has made on >the old server (not in sync), is that change still queued and >will it be >replicated, or will it be lost ? In other words, once the original >content has replicated, is it possible to remove that replica on a live >server, or is it necessary to force somehow a completely quiescent >system (kick off users, shut inbound connectors ecc, wait for >replication ) ? >On the other hand, if it is possible to remove the old instance as soon >as the base content has replicated, how are we supposed to know when >this is if every new change puts the state in "modified" ? I suppose it >is possible to wait and catch the exact moment for single folders, but >if you need to relocate a bunch of folders (remove old server or >whatever), how are you supposed to do it ? > >Also, just another terrifying thought, what if lots of those >folders had >agents installed ? Initially those agents were running on the original >server. At the end of the process they will be running on the new >server. But in between ? Is exchange intelligent enough to run them on >one server only ? Or will it be run on both, possibly conflicting ? > >Feeling more newbie than ever :( .... > >Heiko > >-- >-- PREVINET S.p.A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] >-- Via Ferretto, 1 ph x39-041-5907073 >-- I-31021 Mogliano V.to (TV) fax x39-041-5907087 >-- ITALY > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 10:17 PM >>To: Exchange Discussions >>Subject: RE: (stupid?) directory replication question >> >> >>Message size limits aren't supposed to apply to public folder >>replication >>messages. >> >>I think you should wait a little while longer. >> >>Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP >>Tech Consultant >>Compaq Computer Corporation (soon to be HP) >>All your base are belong to us. >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Herold Heiko >>Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 5:30 AM >>To: Exchange Discussions >>Subject: (stupid?) directory replication question >> >> >>I need to move a pf structure (about 750 folders, about 3GB >>according to >>outlook, however there should be lots of duplicated attachments) to >>another server. All servers are 5.5sp4. >> >>I thought it would be simple - from admin.exe, root folder of the >>structure, add a replica to the new folder, propagate to the >>subfolders. >>Check the public info stores in both server: Replication >>schedule is set >>to always. Since this has some priority, lower the interval to >>5 minutes >>and push up the message size limit to 2MB (probably overkill). >> >>Wait for full replication (has been a couple of days due to other >>issues). Public store on the destination server has grown a lot, then >>stopped (looking at the free space on the filesystem). Huh ? >the public >>store now seems to be about 8GB, outlook said 3GB (and there sould be >>some SIS kicking in, too), after another day I've got (on the dest >>server) 1221 events of 116MB free in public. Free space ?? >> >>Let's check the replication status: >> >>source server\pf store\server replication status says: in sync >> >>on dest server says: local modified. Hmm I suppose this is >>because those >>are live folders - users are working in some of them, in the original >>copy on source server I suppose (since that one says in sync) >> >>Let's check which folders exactly. >> >>source server\pf store\folder replication status: huh ? Almost all of >>those are "local modified", only 27 folders are in sync - should be at >>least 50% due to the current usage pattern. Also, only 44 >folders (only >>2 of those are in sync) have a last received time, starting from the >>moment I added the second replica to "now". All the other have a empty >>entry in that column, although something must have been >>replicated since >>the store on the dest server grew a lot more than the expected amount. >> >>Check the same on the dest server: about 41 of those folders >>are listed, >>all have a "last received time" listed, all are in sync except >>a couple. >>Where are the others ? >> >>Am I doing something wildly wrong or is it just a matter of time ? >> >>Heiko >> >>-- >>-- PREVINET S.p.A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>-- Via Ferretto, 1 ph x39-041-5907073 >>-- I-31021 Mogliano V.to (TV) fax x39-041-5907087 >>-- ITALY >> >> >>_________________________________________________________________ >>List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm >>Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp >>To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >>_________________________________________________________________ >>List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm >>Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp >>To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >_________________________________________________________________ >List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm >Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp >To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >_________________________________________________________________ >List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm >Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp >To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
