General discussion

Locked

Why limit mailbox size?

By jzach ·
What are the reasons for limiting mailbox size other than the 16GB limit for the information store? I have several users with over 500 MB of mail each. My manager has said that we will not limit user's mailbox size. Is there documentation from M$ that suggests that mailboxes should be kept under a certain size? I have 40 users and the PRIV.EDB file just passed 3GB in size. It's running on SBS 2003 with a 3.2 GHz Xeon processor and 4GB ram. I have a mirrored pair for OS and swap and a RAID 5 array with 3 partitions (TLog, Information Store, and user Data). Performance hasn't been an issue so how do I get my manager to buy into mailbox limits? This same server is my only DC because of SBS, Runs DHCP, DNS, WINS, file and printer sharing, Sharepoint, IIS, ftp, etc. For a total of 40 users.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

13 total posts (Page 1 of 2)   01 | 02   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

ONLY 500 MB?

by Cactus Pete In reply to Why limit mailbox size?

I have a few users who are over 10 GB each. The *average* mbox size is over a GB.

Now, picture 700 users and a small backup window with a short recovery window...

If there is a good business reason for keeping EVERYTHING, then just make sure your systems are built to handle it. If not, explain the cost/performance ratio to the boss(es) and let them decide.

But let me just say, please get at least another server. It's not good architecture to put all of those services on the same machine.

Collapse -

Just wait...

by geobeck In reply to Why limit mailbox size?

...until you have some BIG mailboxes. Most importantly: limit the mailbox sizes of your senior managers and your marketing department. Managers "never have time" for mundane tasks like organizing their mail, and marketing departments always fill their mailboxes with huge video clips and images.

Before I cracked down on mailbox size, we had 3 users who accounted for 35% of the space on my Exchange server: two senior managers and our marketing person.

You won't need to limit your technical people; they organize things by nature. Half of them have probably already set up multiple PST files with personal files on their hard drives and work files on their home network folder.

Senior managers are not technical people. Even if they were professional engineers at one point, a few years of management will dull anyone's senses to the point where all they can understand is meetings and org charts. Limit their mailboxes, and tell them there's a technical problem that will not allow their mailbox size to be any bigger, and by the way you need a new RAID-5 array because the platters on the old one are getting dusty.

Collapse -

consider carefully

by dw_ay In reply to Why limit mailbox size?

if you have bigger stores then you should be better in managing hardware storages usually a bigger store cause of performance degradation.
Consider too for backup jobs and data recovery when there is a trouble, how long it takes down time to restore and time to execute backup of the stores. I think you should limite mailbox sizes even for a CEO, just give the appropriate size according to their position and their need.

Collapse -

I think that is exchange suicide.

by Jonny Memonic In reply to Why limit mailbox size?

I think that is exchange suicide.
You should get in the practice of putting limits on the mailboxes. There are several reasons why you should do so.
for example if your users want to access remotely over a vpn, syching 3 gb mailbox will take forever. I cannot imagine if you have to recreate the profile for auser that you might have to do a sometime. the time it will take for all those emails to populate the mailbox will take a long wait.

I think would not see the slow downs because you got 40 users once you expand you alot more users come onboard there you will see performance issues.

I would suggest give a limit of 50MB - 100MB and have your users save to PST files for emails they want to archive and map the pst to a mapped drive to a server for storage then run shadow copying on the server.

That solution would be sweet in my opinion.

Collapse -

PST files on network

by paul.haviland.ctr In reply to I think that is exchange ...

Microsoft doesn't support pst files on the network, if you put the active ones there you could end up with corrouption. You you backup the pst files to the network at night.

Collapse -

MS

by NOW LEFT TR In reply to PST files on network

does not support anything apart from the base install of a product!

having PST's on a network share is not going to cause that much of a problem (done it for years) as long as the Outlook clients are closed when the backups are taken!

Collapse -

Ms article 297019

by paul.haviland.ctr In reply to MS

I have done it for years to but read Microsoft's official word

Collapse -

Easier to manage

by NZ_Justice In reply to Why limit mailbox size?

If you limit mail box's it doesn't have to be 500MB you can keep control of your storage. It also protect against spam and mail bombattacks, if you remove the limit bang there goes all your space, and your exchange server dies.

If one user sends an email with a 10MB connection and they send it to 10 people you have stored 100MBytes in very little time, now if they all resend it to 10 other people you now have 200Mbytes for just one email and one attachment. they they modifiy or add to the attachment then resend it back to the ten people, you now have 300Mbytes, you should be getting the idea. bad stuff can happen very quickly. set up an archiving system save old emails, start using pst files as well.

Collapse -

mailsize multiplying

by paul.haviland.ctr In reply to Easier to manage

In exchange if you send a 10 meg mail package to 1000 people he message size is still 10 meg but it has 1000 pointers. The size doesn't multiply unless users save it to a pst file. I believe thats how it works

Collapse -

don't forget

by Jaqui In reply to Why limit mailbox size?

to take into account yahoo's 1GB mailbox size for their FREE email service.
and Google's 2GB mailbox size for GMAIL accounts.

with the stupidity of people in sending massive multimedia emails you do need larger mailboxes than the old standard of 5 MB.
[ naturally, I detest multimedia emails and concider them spam, no matter who they are from ]

I have close to a gig of plain text emails in my own system, as an email archive from several email lists. the limits do stop people from emailing ripped dvds but then no-one seems to be quite that stupid..yet.

editing to add:

multimedia email includes HTML email

Back to Software Forum
13 total posts (Page 1 of 2)   01 | 02   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums