Just to clarify we don't have Advance Server. And this is not my "vision" it is the view that a number of management folks as well as most end users have. What I am trying to do is explain why this is not the best idea without them just thinking I am being the IT Gestapo.
Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 12:02 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Exchange as a File Store > > > Cost is a non-issue if you've already bought the Exchange > 2000 Advanced Server license. > > I don't think Exchange is a good file system or a good > document management system. It has its own benefits and > drawbacks. A key drawback to your vision is that Exchange is > still relatively difficult to backup and restore compared to > a file system. > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I > Tech Consultant > hp Services > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > Roger Seielstad > Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 8:58 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Exchange as a File Store > > > Is there an issue with it? No, not really. I don't see it as > a good use of resources, however. > > Exchange 2k Enterprise costs roughly what, 4-5 times the cost > of just Windows 2000 server? So cost is an issue. > > The format conversions that happen in Outlook, while lessened > in E2k, aren't completely gone, so there's a bit of a speed > hit as well. > > It can work, but I just don't see the benefits outweighing > the downsides. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE > Sr. Systems Administrator > Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity > Atlanta, GA > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 11:48 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Exchange as a File Store > > > > > > I know this question/problem has been discussed a bit but > here goes. > > First put all the legal/regulatory issues aside. Is there really a > > problem with > > viewing Exchange as one large message/file storage system? > > If keeping it > > simple for users is what it is about then let them simple > keep all the > > messages with attachments in Exchange. I am facing this > > issue and trying to > > explain to management that there are other issues to take > > into consideration. > > Does using Exchange as a file storage/access system add a > > fair amount of > > overhead to the work a server has to do. Is the work the > > computer ahs to do > > significantly greater with this scenario vs having the > > attachments stored as > > files and accessed accordingly? The server is a dual > > processor with a gig of > > ram. It ahs a single raid 5 setup (~100 gigs) and also is > > sued as a file > > server. > > > > Jim Liddil > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > 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]
