Indeed, +pi. This has been bothersome aspect for a few years now since the introduction of search folders instead of sub folders, but we cant have all items in the inbox without some sort of archival process to negate performance issues.
The Exchange team really needs to get on the ball with this. Especially with the dependence of mobile platforms that dont handle sub foldering well. On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Martin Blackstone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Indeed. Outlook is in need of some major design changes to deal with the > large mailboxes people have today (and larger tomorrow). > > Even with mail archival solutions in place, what's the difference if I have > 20,000 messages or 20,000 stubs? > > > > > > From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 5:54 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Outloot Limit on messages per folder > > > > Funny – Microsoft wants to encourage the use of "search folders" etc that > make actual folders obsolete, yet the product (apparently) can't handle > having a few thousand items in an actual folder, necessitating the use of > physical folders... > > > > Cheers > > Ken > > > > From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, 14 August 2008 10:26 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Outloot Limit on messages per folder > > > > You don't need an archive strategy per say, just better mailbox management. > > I use sub folders under my inbox for older mail. > > Say a folder called 2007, 2006, etc. > > > > Yes, they have more than 5000 items, but I rarely hit them, so I can live > with it. > > > > From: Fergal O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 5:19 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Outloot Limit on messages per folder > > > > Exchange 2007 > > Outlook 2003 Sp3. > > > > I knew I saw a KB article about this before – > > Just need some proof before I can confront the user and advise on a archive > strategy. > > All mails are going to the Inbox and not a sub folder. > > > > > > > > From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 14 August 2008 13:02 > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Outloot Limit on messages per folder > > > > What version of Outlook and is this the Inbox or a sub folder. Is this a > PST, OST, or Exchange format. I know with Outlook 2003 using a PST things > usually got sluggish but that depended also on the total disk space being > used and whether I had upgraded to the later version of the PST or was still > using the Outlook 97-2000 version of a PST. > > > > Jon > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 7:40 AM, Fergal O'Connell > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi All > > > > What is the max amount of messages a folder in Outlook should contain? > > > > I have a user with approx 20000 messages in his Inbox and Outlook is causing > problems > > > > > > > > Regards > > Fergal O'Connell > > ICT Support > > > > The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. > > It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else > > is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, > > copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance > > on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended > > addressee please contact the sender and dispose of this e-mail. Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. > > It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else > > is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, > > copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance > > on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended > > addressee please contact the sender and dispose of this e-mail. Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- ME2 ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
