In this case, is there a performance hit difference between having 50+ subfolders under the Mailbox vs. having them under the Inbox ? We haave Symantec¹s Enterprise Vault in place to archive items in the mailbox but thus far we¹ve been telling users to either create subfolders under the mailbox or under their inbox, eithe rway stubs are stubs & subfolders are just that & there is no difference if there¹s benefit to one over the other, I¹d be interested to hear,
On 8/14/08 12:06 PM, "Micheal Espinola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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/> ~ > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
