The other issue you can bring to management is about your retention policy. Get one, get it published. Enforce it. This keeps the people that want to save e-mail forever in line.
> -----Original Message----- > From: John Matteson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 11:32 AM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Information Store Limit > > Depending on how far back this stuff goes, you can look into a message > archiving system, this pulls mail that meet certain criteria (age, size, > whatever) off to tape and leaves you with a link to the data inside the > message. When you need the message back, you click on the message, wait > for the tape to access the data and it gets restored automagically. > > As for upgrading to Enterprise, that would be a solution as well. > Management needs to make some decisions. > > Personally, if these JPG files are in "active" messages (the business > client is current), then I would kick management to get the upgrade to > Enterprise and look at getting some additional hardware to support the > growing mail store. > > John Matteson; Exchange Manager > Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards > (404) 239 - 2981 > With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. - RFC 1925 > -----Original Message----- > From: Randy Hensel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 11:13 AM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Information Store Limit > > > We are a publishing company and we deal a lot with jpg files, most > of our clients send them to us via email. We have an FTP server but most > clients are not that tech savvy. A quick check of who the top offenders > are shows that without exception they are the client contacts who receive > these JPG files. These users like to keep these files to refer to back to > when doing new jobs. I can understand the need to keep them, I just don't > think it is necessary to keep them on the server. For those who say PST > files are bad. What would you do? Upgrade to Enterprise, and let users > have unlimited mailbox size? (that's not a rhetorical question, I > understand your reasoning but it doesn't leave many options) Imposing > arbitrary limits is not going to fly as Frank pointed out. That is > something I am considering but there is a lot of data to purge before I > can even consider that. > > Randy Hensel, MCP, Network Systems Administrator > Coffey Communications, Inc. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 509.525.0101 Ext. 594 > 509.525.4793 (Fax) > <http://www.coffeycomm.com/> > -----Original Message----- > From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 7:37 AM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Information Store Limit > > You will end up spending more money for disk space (server side or > workstation side) if you put PST files into the mix. You loose a lot of > advantages for SIS and other things. > > Have you talked to management? What about getting management to back > you running Exchange Mailbox Manager on the server? Thought about running > Exmerge against the store to clear out all the MP3/AVI/MPEG/MOV files that > are littering up the place? > > John Matteson; Exchange Manager > Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards > (404) 239 - 2981 > With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. - RFC 1925 > -----Original Message----- > From: Randy Hensel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 10:35 AM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Information Store Limit > I will have to go with William on this one. I have 147 > users the top 10 offenders account for more that 9GB of data. As I see it > I have 2 options, Spend $3300 on an Enterprise upgrade, or set storage > quotas and encourage the use of PST files. Seems like a no brainer to me, > I have 5 users with more than 1GB each. I don't mind users saving every > little email but it seems logical that they should find somewhere else to > put them. > > Randy Hensel, MCP, Network Systems Administrator > Coffey Communications, Inc. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 509.525.0101 Ext. 594 > 509.525.4793 (Fax) > <http://www.coffeycomm.com/> > -----Original Message----- > From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 5:24 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Information Store Limit > > What else you got? ;o) > > Not for primary email storage. Only for archiving. > > -----Original Message----- > From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 5:23 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Information Store Limit > but stable ? > -----Original Message----- > From: Lefkovics, William > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 19:46 > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Information Store Limit > It is a viable form of email archiving. > > William > > -----Original Message----- > From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 4:34 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Information Store Limit > as in don't use them > -----Original Message----- > From: Randy Hensel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 19:07 > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Information Store Limit > I'm not sure I can recover that much space, I am > planning an upgrade to 2000. I don't have a quota in place it looks like > I will need to implement that as well as plan some formal training on the > use of pst files. > > Randy Hensel, MCP, Network Systems Administrator > Coffey Communications, Inc. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 509.525.0101 Ext. 594 > 509.525.4793 (Fax) > <http://www.coffeycomm.com/> > -----Original Message----- > From: Lefkovics, William > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 3:59 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Information Store Limit > > If you recover enough space within the database > (perhaps 6GB+), an offline defrag would not be a bad idea. > > Otherwise, yor plan is certainly sound. Do you have > a formal mailbox quota policy in place? > > William > > -----Original Message----- > From: Randy Hensel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 3:57 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Information Store Limit > I am running Windows NT 4.0 SP 6a and Exchange 5.5 > SP 4 (not Enterprise) I have run up against the 16GB information store > limit. I have managed to the IS started again and would like to take > steps to reduce the IS size. My plan is to: > > 1. Move data to PST files > 2. delete unused mailboxes > 3. reduce deleted item retention > > Is this a good plan? Should I also do an off line > defrag? Any thing else? > > Thanks > > Randy Hensel, MCP, Network Systems Administrator > Coffey Communications, Inc. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 509.525.0101 Ext. 594 > 509.525.4793 (Fax) > <http://www.coffeycomm.com/> > > List Charter and FAQ at: > > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm > List Charter and FAQ at: > > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm > List Charter and FAQ at: > > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm > List Charter and FAQ at: > > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm > List Charter and FAQ at: > > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm > List Charter and FAQ at: > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm > List Charter and FAQ at: > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm > List Charter and FAQ at: > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm > List Charter and FAQ at: > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm > List Charter and FAQ at: > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm > > List Charter and FAQ at: > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm > List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
