ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Outlook .pst folder redirection possible?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion
    outlookexchangepstost
    68 Posts 9 Posters 19.4k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • iroalI
      iroal @scottalanmiller
      last edited by

      @scottalanmiller said:

      @iroal said:

      Where I work nobody delete e-mails.
      I try to explain the problem with the size in Exchange but they just don't care.

      Only way I found to reduce the Exchange Database was use Pst, we have a lot, and many are really big.

      I put all of them in an old server, 12 years old, It works perfect, no problems since I use this system.

      Why not just let Exchange get bigger? How much are we talking per user? Average and worst case?

      We still use Exchange 2003 , actual database size is near to 200Gb, It's complicate recover backups with this size.

      I hope in 2016 we move to Exchange Online and I can forget Pst and Exchange Backups with Backup Exec.

      scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • scottalanmillerS
        scottalanmiller @iroal
        last edited by

        @iroal said:

        @scottalanmiller said:

        @iroal said:

        Where I work nobody delete e-mails.
        I try to explain the problem with the size in Exchange but they just don't care.

        Only way I found to reduce the Exchange Database was use Pst, we have a lot, and many are really big.

        I put all of them in an old server, 12 years old, It works perfect, no problems since I use this system.

        Why not just let Exchange get bigger? How much are we talking per user? Average and worst case?

        We still use Exchange 2003 , actual database size is near to 200Gb, It's complicate recover backups with this size.

        I hope in 2016 we move to Exchange Online and I can forget Pst and Exchange Backups with Backup Exec.

        OMG 2003!! Exchange was so bad back then. It wasn't really usable until 2010. 2013 was a huge leap forward. 200GB is not that large for a single mailbox in 2013, but for a 2003 system that is problematic.

        JaredBuschJ iroalI DashrenderD 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • JaredBuschJ
          JaredBusch @scottalanmiller
          last edited by

          @scottalanmiller said:

          @iroal said:

          @scottalanmiller said:

          @iroal said:

          Where I work nobody delete e-mails.
          I try to explain the problem with the size in Exchange but they just don't care.

          Only way I found to reduce the Exchange Database was use Pst, we have a lot, and many are really big.

          I put all of them in an old server, 12 years old, It works perfect, no problems since I use this system.

          Why not just let Exchange get bigger? How much are we talking per user? Average and worst case?

          We still use Exchange 2003 , actual database size is near to 200Gb, It's complicate recover backups with this size.

          I hope in 2016 we move to Exchange Online and I can forget Pst and Exchange Backups with Backup Exec.

          OMG 2003!! Exchange was so bad back then. It wasn't really usable until 2010. 2013 was a huge leap forward. 200GB is not that large for a single mailbox in 2013, but for a 2003 system that is problematic.

          200GB Exchange database, not mailbox.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • scottalanmillerS
            scottalanmiller
            last edited by

            Oh right, ha ha.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • iroalI
              iroal @scottalanmiller
              last edited by

              @scottalanmiller said:

              @iroal said:

              @scottalanmiller said:

              @iroal said:

              Where I work nobody delete e-mails.
              I try to explain the problem with the size in Exchange but they just don't care.

              Only way I found to reduce the Exchange Database was use Pst, we have a lot, and many are really big.

              I put all of them in an old server, 12 years old, It works perfect, no problems since I use this system.

              Why not just let Exchange get bigger? How much are we talking per user? Average and worst case?

              We still use Exchange 2003 , actual database size is near to 200Gb, It's complicate recover backups with this size.

              I hope in 2016 we move to Exchange Online and I can forget Pst and Exchange Backups with Backup Exec.

              OMG 2003!! Exchange was so bad back then. It wasn't really usable until 2010. 2013 was a huge leap forward. 200GB is not that large for a single mailbox in 2013, but for a 2003 system that is problematic.

              It's not so bad for a SMB, just one little problem in the 5 years I'm working here.

              Now thanks to Outlook 2013 and 2016, they are not compatible with Exchange 2003, they are thinking in move the mail to Exchange Online.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • scottalanmillerS
                scottalanmiller
                last edited by

                It was the disaster of Exchange 2003 that drove us to Zimbra back in that era 🙂

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • DashrenderD
                  Dashrender @scottalanmiller
                  last edited by

                  @scottalanmiller said:

                  @iroal said:

                  @scottalanmiller said:

                  @iroal said:

                  Where I work nobody delete e-mails.
                  I try to explain the problem with the size in Exchange but they just don't care.

                  Only way I found to reduce the Exchange Database was use Pst, we have a lot, and many are really big.

                  I put all of them in an old server, 12 years old, It works perfect, no problems since I use this system.

                  Why not just let Exchange get bigger? How much are we talking per user? Average and worst case?

                  We still use Exchange 2003 , actual database size is near to 200Gb, It's complicate recover backups with this size.

                  I hope in 2016 we move to Exchange Online and I can forget Pst and Exchange Backups with Backup Exec.

                  OMG 2003!! Exchange was so bad back then. It wasn't really usable until 2010. 2013 was a huge leap forward. 200GB is not that large for a single mailbox in 2013, but for a 2003 system that is problematic.

                  Amazed you don't have all kinds of problems with a mail store that large on 2003.

                  MS improved disk performance and a million other things with new versions of Exchange - damn you really want to move ASAP 😉

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • scottalanmillerS
                    scottalanmiller
                    last edited by

                    For an entire store, 200GB isn't all that big. That's four mailboxes in the Hosted Exchange world 🙂

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • iroalI
                      iroal
                      last edited by iroal

                      0_1450249832259_Exchange.jpg

                      Not bad for an Exchange 2003 😏

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                      • scottalanmillerS
                        scottalanmiller
                        last edited by

                        Not too shabby!

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • J
                          Jason Banned
                          last edited by

                          Our exchange team has us limited to 100MB mailboxes (we archive forever off of exchange though). and we still have 2.5TB of Mailboxes.

                          DashrenderD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • DashrenderD
                            Dashrender @Jason
                            last edited by

                            @Jason said:

                            Our exchange team has us limited to 100MB mailboxes (we archive forever off of exchange though). and we still have 2.5TB of Mailboxes.

                            lol - I do the same thing here.

                            But now I'm reconsidering that. And I'm looking at what it will take for us to move to O365.

                            L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • L
                              LAH3385 @Dashrender
                              last edited by LAH3385

                              I did not expected to get so many feedbacks. Go MangoLassi!

                              @Dashrender
                              For our environment it cost roughly 45K(it's 4.5K not 45K) to migrate all data out of our third party Exchange server. This include 5 years worth of compliance achived data.

                              EDIT: Just went through the quote again and it was 4.5K. wow... 45K... LOL

                              DashrenderD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • DashrenderD
                                Dashrender @LAH3385
                                last edited by

                                @LAH3385 said:

                                I did not expected to get so many feedbacks. Go MangoLassi!

                                @Dashrender
                                For our environment it cost roughly 45K to migrate all data out of our third party Exchange server. This include 5 years worth of compliance achived data.

                                Why so expensive? Do you need to migrate the archive data? Can you leave it where it is until it expires?

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • 1
                                • 2
                                • 3
                                • 4
                                • 4 / 4
                                • First post
                                  Last post