William's being modest. He's one of the "several" he mentions...
> -----Original Message----- > From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 12:49 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Basic Exchange 2K questions > > > Several of the people here have written or contributed to > those books. This > forum will compliment your reading. > > William > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 9:50 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Basic Exchange 2K questions > > > Thanks everyone for your input - > > I just ordered every book under the sun for EX2K from Amazon - so > I hope once I read through all of them, I will have a deeper > understanding of how this whole thing works. > > Most of the issues, is me being out of the Exchange loop for so > long, but I always admired Exchange - but was always scared off > by it's complexity. But now, I simply cannot ignore it's > wonderful features any longer - and it's time to jump back on > the wagon once again. > > I am still getting nothing but 'Access Denied' through the OWA > and am ready to bash my head into a wall soon - if I can't > get this crazy thing working soon. Are there any articles > that cover this topic in depth? > > Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhh! > > Thanks - > > Mike > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lefkovics, > William > Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 11:25 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Basic Exchange 2K questions > > > 1) Exchange2000 is 'self-tuning' (Is that Scharff laughing?). > There is no > performance optimiser, though third parties may be testing something > similar. > > 2) Exchange5.x uses its own directory services. The > directory database was > stored in a file called dir.edb. Exchange2000 does not > maintain its own > directory, but rather leverages the power and benefits of > Active Directory. > Exchange information is now across all domain controllers and > accessible > using ADSI or GUIs for AD. > > 3) Exchange2000 seems to believe the admin/installer is > capable of assessing > drive optimisation. Standard database and transaction log > location follow > setups as they were in 5.x. > > 4) The M:\ drive is there for IFS. However, I think it should not be > visible by default as this has caused more problems than > benefit. It also > may not be there in future releases. Not many people are using IFS > correctly. > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en- > us/wss/wss/_es > dk_arch_win2k_ntfsifs.asp > > William Lefkovics, MCSE-NT4, MCSE-W2K, A+, ExchangeMVP > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Why just ride, when you can fly? > http://www.airborne.net > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Rent this space: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 9:10 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Basic Exchange 2K questions > > > Hello, > > Are there any articles out there that explain why there are such > radical changes since Exchange 5.x -> 2000? > > For example, maybe all of you can shed some light on 3 questions: > > 1. In 5.x - part of the install was a performance test of the system > and all the hard drives - and it would suggest or let you specify > where the message store and log files should go. > > 2. Why is Active Directory such a huge component of Exchange 2000 > functioning? > > 3. Why the heck does most of the data reside on a single drive by > default? This question sort of reverts back to question #1 - > and it just seems silly for the install process to not want to > take advantage of multiple volumes, for performance reasons. > > 4. What's up with this "M" Drive? I know it's a virtual drive, but > it's just such an odd way for storing data. Especially when you > are trying to view the contents of the M Drive - you can only do > it inside of Explorer, or Browsing through Folders. If you try > to expand the tree inside of the IIS Utility, it gives an error > of not being able to list all the subdirectories. It's just plain > weird. > > Thank you ALL so much for your answers - > > Best Regards, > > Mike > > > _________________________________________________________________ > 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]
