| Author |
Message |
jpreou
Guest
|
 Posted:
Thu Jan 13, 2005 4:59 am Post subject:
Adding a new Exchange server to an existing SBS200 network |
|
|
One of my customers is *very* close to hitting the 16Gb limit in Exchange,
even though they only have about 25 users. Rather than migrating to separate
components, which would be very expensive, I wondered if we could add another
Exchange server. I tested this is a virtual environment and didn't appear to
have too much trouble bring a Windows 2003/Exchange 2003 server into the
existing network and migrating all the user mailboxes, public folders,
offline address lists, Schedule+ free/busy information. However, if I try to
create another Mailbox Store I get the same error as you would in SBS2000,
suggesting that I am still hampered by the SBS limit of a single Mailbox
Store, even though I am now running Exchange 2003 on it's own box. Anyone
care to shed any further light on where I might go from here ? Cheers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pablo Vernocchi
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Jan 13, 2005 5:23 am Post subject:
Re: Adding a new Exchange server to an existing SBS200 netwo |
|
|
It would be cheapear if you download old emails to PST...
--
Saludos,
-----------
Pablo Vernocchi
vernocchi@nospam.redusers.com
Buenos Aires, Argentina
"jpreou" <jpreou@discussions.microsoft.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:EAFFBF2A-4C5C-4F58-B8B3-6E485D7E3288@microsoft.com...
| Quote: | One of my customers is *very* close to hitting the 16Gb limit in Exchange,
even though they only have about 25 users. Rather than migrating to
separate
components, which would be very expensive, I wondered if we could add
another
Exchange server. I tested this is a virtual environment and didn't appear
to
have too much trouble bring a Windows 2003/Exchange 2003 server into the
existing network and migrating all the user mailboxes, public folders,
offline address lists, Schedule+ free/busy information. However, if I try
to
create another Mailbox Store I get the same error as you would in SBS2000,
suggesting that I am still hampered by the SBS limit of a single Mailbox
Store, even though I am now running Exchange 2003 on it's own box. Anyone
care to shed any further light on where I might go from here ? Cheers. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:50 am Post subject:
Re: Adding a new Exchange server to an existing SBS200 netwo |
|
|
Pablo Vernocchi wrote:
| Quote: | It would be cheapear if you download old emails to PST...
|
Yes, but the data would take up more space, would be in a fragile file
format, would be difficult to backup/maintain, etc - if data is important,
it belongs on the server.
| Quote: |
One of my customers is *very* close to hitting the 16Gb limit in
Exchange, even though they only have about 25 users. Rather than
migrating to separate
components, which would be very expensive, I wondered if we could add
another
Exchange server. I tested this is a virtual environment and didn't
appear to
have too much trouble bring a Windows 2003/Exchange 2003 server into
the existing network and migrating all the user mailboxes, public
folders, offline address lists, Schedule+ free/busy information.
However, if I try to
create another Mailbox Store I get the same error as you would in
SBS2000, suggesting that I am still hampered by the SBS limit of a
single Mailbox Store, even though I am now running Exchange 2003 on
it's own box. Anyone care to shed any further light on where I might
go from here ? Cheers. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:52 am Post subject:
Re: Adding a new Exchange server to an existing SBS200 netwo |
|
|
jpreou wrote:
| Quote: | One of my customers is *very* close to hitting the 16Gb limit in
Exchange, even though they only have about 25 users. Rather than
migrating to separate components, which would be very expensive, I
wondered if we could add another Exchange server. I tested this is a
virtual environment and didn't appear to have too much trouble bring
a Windows 2003/Exchange 2003 server into the existing network and
migrating all the user mailboxes, public folders, offline address
lists, Schedule+ free/busy information. However, if I try to create
another Mailbox Store I get the same error as you would in SBS2000,
suggesting that I am still hampered by the SBS limit of a single
Mailbox Store, even though I am now running Exchange 2003 on it's own
box. Anyone care to shed any further light on where I might go from
here ? Cheers.
|
Only Exchange Enteprise edition (any version) allows for multiple mailbox
stores - and Standard is still bound to the 16GB limit per store,
unfortunately, despite much complaining.
Do you actually need another mailbox store? Exchange Enterprise ain't cheap.
Just do load balancing - put some of the heavier users on the new Exchange
server -don't move 'em all.
But they do need sensible mailbox quotas (or, they need something in writing
from you stating that this is likely to happen again soon if they don't keep
a handle on their data). Also consider your backup strategy when doing
anything like this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jpreou
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:17 pm Post subject:
Re: Adding a new Exchange server to an existing SBS200 netwo |
|
|
Hi Lanwench, I was under the impression you could have 4 storage groups of 5
databases, but double-checking the comparison between versions I see that the
Std version is indeed limited to a single database per server. I obviously
missed that last time I looked. Bummer!
In that case, my next thought was the same as yours : since we are still
limited to 16Gb, move only the heaviest users to the new [faster] server.
Here in NZ the Std Edition is around $1500 (NZ) whereas the Enterprise
Edition is around $9000 (NZ). YIKES! Can't see the customer stumping up that
kind of cash!!
In response to a previous poster, PSTs are not an option for this particular
company and their high usage is genuine usage, not just lazy employees not
clearing their mail. Their heaviest users would soon bust the 2Gb PST limit
(they don't all have Outlook 2003) and then they would have troubles! Nor do
I want massive PSTs being dragged all over the network (since they would have
to be stored on a server to be backed up). And if a user decides to have
Outlook open during the backup window (sometimes they work late) the PST
would be skipped anyway.
Thanks for your advice.
"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:
| Quote: | jpreou wrote:
One of my customers is *very* close to hitting the 16Gb limit in
Exchange, even though they only have about 25 users. Rather than
migrating to separate components, which would be very expensive, I
wondered if we could add another Exchange server. I tested this is a
virtual environment and didn't appear to have too much trouble bring
a Windows 2003/Exchange 2003 server into the existing network and
migrating all the user mailboxes, public folders, offline address
lists, Schedule+ free/busy information. However, if I try to create
another Mailbox Store I get the same error as you would in SBS2000,
suggesting that I am still hampered by the SBS limit of a single
Mailbox Store, even though I am now running Exchange 2003 on it's own
box. Anyone care to shed any further light on where I might go from
here ? Cheers.
Only Exchange Enteprise edition (any version) allows for multiple mailbox
stores - and Standard is still bound to the 16GB limit per store,
unfortunately, despite much complaining.
Do you actually need another mailbox store? Exchange Enterprise ain't cheap.
Just do load balancing - put some of the heavier users on the new Exchange
server -don't move 'em all.
But they do need sensible mailbox quotas (or, they need something in writing
from you stating that this is likely to happen again soon if they don't keep
a handle on their data). Also consider your backup strategy when doing
anything like this.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Jan 13, 2005 10:23 pm Post subject:
Re: Adding a new Exchange server to an existing SBS200 netwo |
|
|
jpreou wrote:
| Quote: | Hi Lanwench, I was under the impression you could have 4 storage
groups of 5 databases, but double-checking the comparison between
versions I see that the Std version is indeed limited to a single
database per server. I obviously missed that last time I looked.
Bummer!
|
Yes - and annoyingly, MS hasn't bumped up the limit for Standard to 32GB
despite constant pleading and whingeing.
| Quote: |
In that case, my next thought was the same as yours : since we are
still limited to 16Gb, move only the heaviest users to the new
[faster] server. Here in NZ the Std Edition is around $1500 (NZ)
whereas the Enterprise Edition is around $9000 (NZ). YIKES! Can't see
the customer stumping up that kind of cash!!
|
Yeah, it's quite expensive.
| Quote: |
In response to a previous poster, PSTs are not an option for this
particular company and their high usage is genuine usage, not just
lazy employees not clearing their mail. Their heaviest users would
soon bust the 2Gb PST limit (they don't all have Outlook 2003) and
then they would have troubles! Nor do I want massive PSTs being
dragged all over the network (since they would have to be stored on a
server to be backed up). And if a user decides to have Outlook open
during the backup window (sometimes they work late) the PST would be
skipped anyway.
|
Good call - and note that MS doesn't support accessing PST files across
network connections anyway. You'd run into lost/corrupt data and huge
performance problems. If data is important, it should stay in the mailbox on
the server.
| Quote: |
Thanks for your advice.
"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:
jpreou wrote:
One of my customers is *very* close to hitting the 16Gb limit in
Exchange, even though they only have about 25 users. Rather than
migrating to separate components, which would be very expensive, I
wondered if we could add another Exchange server. I tested this is a
virtual environment and didn't appear to have too much trouble bring
a Windows 2003/Exchange 2003 server into the existing network and
migrating all the user mailboxes, public folders, offline address
lists, Schedule+ free/busy information. However, if I try to create
another Mailbox Store I get the same error as you would in SBS2000,
suggesting that I am still hampered by the SBS limit of a single
Mailbox Store, even though I am now running Exchange 2003 on it's
own box. Anyone care to shed any further light on where I might go
from here ? Cheers.
Only Exchange Enteprise edition (any version) allows for multiple
mailbox stores - and Standard is still bound to the 16GB limit per
store, unfortunately, despite much complaining.
Do you actually need another mailbox store? Exchange Enterprise
ain't cheap. Just do load balancing - put some of the heavier users
on the new Exchange server -don't move 'em all.
But they do need sensible mailbox quotas (or, they need something in
writing from you stating that this is likely to happen again soon if
they don't keep a handle on their data). Also consider your backup
strategy when doing anything like this. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in