What about creating additional stores and then moving the mailboxes to
the new stores.
Kill 2 birds with 1 stone
- reduce quantity of whitespace
- get rid of your obscenely large priv
-Original Message-
From: Charles Marriott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Thursday, August 01,
Excellent suggestion.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Stephen
Mynhier
Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2002 2:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: offline defrag and 195 Gb store E2K
What about creating additional stores
version Exchange?
- Original Message -
From: Charles Marriott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 12:44 PM
Subject: offline defrag and 195 Gb store E2K
Having trouble removing whitespace from 195 Gb store.
Is there an issue
It could take awhile. What kind of trouble are you experiencing? Event
log entries?
W
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Charles
Marriott
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 10:44 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: offline defrag and 195
Hidden in the subject line.
What sp?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 9:22 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: offline defrag and 195 Gb store E2K
version Exchange?
- Original
If you have time on your hands go ahead. Not necessary in my opinion unless
you suspect database is starting to become corrupt.
- Original Message -
From: John Strange [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 9:00 AM
Subject: Offline
Never, unless you have the standard edition and are approaching the 16GB DB
limit or you have mass deleted gigs of data and would like to reclaim, the
space.
No, see above...
Exchange does its own maintenance...
-Original Message-
From: John Strange [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
that is potentially corrupted, the risk of not being able to mount your
stores is greatly increased.
Serdar Soysal
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 11:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Offline Defrag
If you have time
When I meant offline I forgot to say run it on a separate box. Yes I agree.
I assumed most of us know that.
- Original Message -
From: Soysal, Serdar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 2:20 PM
Subject: RE: Offline Defrag
I'm still curious as to WHY? Separate or not... WHY?
Don Ely - NMBOTWBAS and then some
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 2:58 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Offline Defrag
When I meant offline
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, at 8:00am, John Strange wrote:
What are the best practices for doing an Offline defrag on Exchange 2000?
Don't.
The only exception if when you have just removed a large amount of mail
from a server (say, splitting up a server to two servers), and you need to
reclaim the
11 matches
Mail list logo
