Attachment Size in GW 6

We have GroupWise 6 and to date have not initiated a Size limit policy.  In checking mailbox sizes I have found that our CEO has over 19GB of email and attachments.
How can I Tell how much of that is attachments and more specifically how large the attachments are.
We are switching to EX 2003 (Yes, I know . . . whine moan groan) and I need to figure out how much space I will need.
Also, is GW a space hog for emails?  I checked my box and have over 330MB of email in a 5 month time frame :
 User stats:  1323 InBox, 1302 OutBox, 9 WasteBasket
  Disk space management values:  Size Limit - 0KB, Threshold - 0%
      330423 kbytes in use by user's mail

I have used Outlook for years before coming here and never went over 150MB in all the time I have had it.
LVL 1
Indy_IT_AdminAsked:
Who is Participating?
 
ShineOnConnect With a Mentor Commented:
Another thing about licensing - as PsiCop said, GroupWise is "per user."  If on NetWare, that includes the eDirectory license to access the GW Domain databases.

An Echange license does not give you access rights to the Exchange message store.  It only lets you use a non-Windows-connected method like IMAP/POP to get your mail.  In order to use the Outlook/Exchange combo, you also have to buy a user CAL.

The only way around that is to get one of those super-CAL-i-fragi-listic CALs that cost ~ 400 bux apiece, that let one person access all of Microsoft's server-based products.
0
 
PsiCopCommented:
Space hog? No, GroupWise tends to be as efficient as possible. Send out an E-Mail to everyone in the Post Office, and there's actually only ONE copy of the E-Mail. The other users get a pointer to it in their mailbox.

322 MB for a total of 2,634 messages seems a bit high. Either you have a lot of porky attachments, or that's not all in your mailbox. Do you not use the Calendar? How about Folders in the Cabinet?

Run a GWCHECK and select the Audit option under Actions. Make sure that Logging is Verbose. This should give you a fairly good idea of the storage used by everyone on the system.

Remember waybadmojo's admonition that you can expect this to pork out by 10x when you swallow that bottle full of blue pills.
0
 
Indy_IT_AdminAuthor Commented:
Yes I have folders in my Cabinet.  2634 seems about right for a total.  Oddly enough I ran the report again withou Verbose checked and got the following.  By the way, which number is correct the " Checking user = rcarrell    11449344 bytes" or the "83784 kbytes in use by user's mail"?:
Other questions:  Does this amount include attachments or just the space for the pointer? For example if someone sent out 10 pictures to the entire office.  Does my amount include those pictures eventhough there is only instance of those files?

NON-VERBOSE
STRUCTURAL VERIFICATION of system databases
    STRUCTURAL VERIFICATION of database ngwguard.db
      - Database is structurally consistent
Reading Guardian Database store catalog info

Searching for User/Post Office information for rcarrell
- User found, Fid=aqy, Diskid=21, PO=JMPO, Path=JMSRV1/DATA:\jmpo


  Checking user = rcarrell      (aqy)  11449344 bytes, 05/10/05 21:41 (Ron Carrell [])
    CONTENTS VERIFICATION/STATISTICS analysis of db JMSRV1/DATA:\jmpo\ofuser\useraqy.db
      - 1000 records found, last DRN = 8337
      - checking Data records
  User stats:  431 InBox, 343 OutBox, 16 WasteBasket
  Disk space management values:  Size Limit - 0KB, Threshold - 0%
      83784 kbytes in use by user's mail

VERBOSE

STRUCTURAL VERIFICATION of system databases
    STRUCTURAL VERIFICATION of database ngwguard.db
      - Database is structurally consistent
Reading Guardian Database store catalog info

Searching for User/Post Office information for rcarrell
- User found, Fid=aqy, Diskid=21, PO=JMPO, Path=JMSRV1/DATA:\jmpo


  Checking user = rcarrell      (aqy)  11449344 bytes, 05/10/05 21:42 (Ron Carrell [])
0
Hire Technology Freelancers with Gigs

Work with freelancers specializing in everything from database administration to programming, who have proven themselves as experts in their field. Hire the best, collaborate easily, pay securely, and get projects done right.

 
Indy_IT_AdminAuthor Commented:
Also,
Calander is used very lightly.
Tasks almost never
And there are 2 shared folders with about 20 text only emails each.
0
 
PsiCopConnect With a Mentor Commented:
"For example if someone sent out 10 pictures to the entire office.  Does my amount include those pictures eventhough there is only instance of those files?"

That's a good question - the reason its a little fuzzy has to do with space accounting. In the system, there is only one copy (for all users on a given Post Office) or a given E-Mail and its attachment(s), if any. If you also sent it to users on another Post Office in the same GroupWise system, then there is another copy in that Post Office. So, disk space consumption is minimized.

What you're asking seems to be more along the lines of how a user's mailbox is handled in terms of accounting for their disk space usage. And, as we know, accounting doesn't always follow reality (which is how we end up with TCO studies that manage a straight face when they claim Redmond's TCO is lower than everything else).

Anyway, the general rule of thumb in the GroupWise internal accounting system is that mailbox size limitations are applied against the user's space consumption as calculated by the items in the Sent Items folder. That is, you're "charged" for what you've SENT, not received; the "charge" is based solely on the size of the Sent Items, including Attachments.

Generally, the total "charges" will follow your mailbox's actual disk space consumption as reported by the Mailbox/Library Maintenance tool (either the built-in one or the standalone GWCHECK), but scenarios are possible where you delete items from your Sent Items folder, but they do not cease to be "charged" against your mailbox limit. This can happen by the same rules as Message Retraction - if someone has opened an E-Mail, you cannot Retract it from them. You can only Retract an E-Mail from someone who has not yet opened it. The practical effect here is that if you Delete an E-Mail (Calendar entries, Tasks and Notes are handled slightly differently) from your Sent Items folder after the recipient (in GroupWise - E-Mail solely to outside the system can always be Retracted internally - altho, of course, that has no effect outside the mail system) has opened it, it remains in the GroupWise message store until such time as any and all recipients who opened it before your Delete request themselves delete it (either manually, or Archive it, or its purged by some limit imposed on the system). This is a possible scenario where what you're "charged" for by a mailbox audit does not necessarily match what's in your Sent Items folder.

As for which number is correct, that depends on the message retention policy that has been enacted (in your case, none), and what database maintenance you've been performing (GroupWise v6 implements a number of automated processes - I'll assume they were not turned off). In your specific case, it seems that the User DB (located in the OFUSERS subdirectory) associated with your account is 10.9MB in size. If the automated database maintenance processes are intact, then that's probably not got much "fat" (deleted records that have not been removed from the system) in it. You could run a simple Reduce (nothing fancy, just to get rid of deleted records) on it, but if the automated stuff is running, then I don't imagine you'd have a much smaller database as a result (the Reduce would remove all the deleted records and compact the database - much as the automated tasks will do). If the automated database maintenance processes are disabled, then a Reduce could reclaim a lot of space.

The "83784 kbytes in use by user's mail" means that the GroupWise internal accounting system would "charge" you for about 81MB of E-Mail.

So, why is one "10.9MB" and the other "81MB"? Good question.

Your User DB is not your E-Mail. Your E-mail, sent or received, along with your Calendar items, Tasks, etc.; is stored in the GroupWise Message Store, a series of 25 SQLite databases in the OFMSG directory. Your attachments are in the OFFILES directory structure (some of your E-Mails are there too - any E-Mail where the message body exceeds 2KB is stored as an attachment).

So, what is in your User DB? A number of things. For example, if you've set a GroupWise password, its in there. Personal preferences, signatures, Folder options, Filters, Cabinet structure, Rules, etc. And, a record pointing to every E-Mail you've ever sent or received that is still in the GroupWise message store (even if you've deleted it from your mailbox). Plus, any deleted records that have not yet been purged.

If you've only got about 1,000 messages in your mailbox, but your User DB is 10 MB, I find that kinda odd. I have about 10K messages in mine and my User DB is only 20 MB. The only handy explanation I can think of is that you've never performed any maintenance on your system, and the automated processes were turned off, and most of what's in your User DB is deleted records that have never been purged. If you're having performance problems with GroupWise, perhaps lack of maintenance is the problem. If you think EX will do any better when neglected, you're sadly mistaken (and if the lack of maintenance is the situation, that calls into question the wisdom of a migration even more).
0
 
PsiCopCommented:
Lend me your eyes for 5 minutes....then I'll shut up about this.

I'm concerned that you're finding yourself (perhaps by inheritance) with a GroupWise system that really hasn't been managed right. And now GroupWise is being blamed for things that are not its fault, and a hasty decision is being made to abandon it. And its probably not a good  *business*  decision.

This about about *business*...let me point out some business drivers. Not what system has the "best features" or whose code is better - business drivers as opposed to tech ones.

1) It makes business sense to avoid the cost of single-vendor lock-in. GroupWise is multi-platform - it will run on 2 different flavors of Linux, Solaris, NetWare *and* W2K/3. Exchange only runs on W2K/3. GroupWise offers you flexibility, and the power to adapt as your business needs change. This is a freedom your company will never get from Redmond.

2) GroupWise is multi-directory-service - while it leverages eDirectory, its also comfortable in non-eDirectory environments that have LDAP-compliant interfaces. Exchange is built around AD, and locks you into that. Again, you lose flexibility, the power to adapt, and the freedom to choose the best solution for *your* needs.

3) GroupWise is licensed per-seat. There are no per-server or per-CPU charges, nor is there the any of the "CAL *and* Exchange" shenanigans. You are free to deploy GroupWise on as many or as few physical servers as meet your *business* needs, without constantly paying additional licensing charges. This is a freedom and flexibility you won't get from Exchange.

4) GroupWise is cluster-enabled out-of-the-box. Exchange charges you more, and then adds per-server charges for the cluster servers, porking out your bottom line without necessity.

5) There are *native* GroupWise clients for Linux, Mac, Palm and PocketPC (in addition to Windows). Exchange supports  less than half of those *natively*. GroupWise gives you the *choice* of client platforms - Exchange locks you in to one or two.

6) If you have access, look up TCO studies by Gartner Group, Nucleus Research and Burton Group. Every *independent* TCO study has determined that Exchange costs significantly (2x to 3x) more to own and manage than GroupWise. And for no additional functionality. Is that a wise investment of business dollars?

7) In the Novell Cluster Services (NCS) environment, GroupWise can failover between Linux and NetWare platforms, freely (support for more platforms is forthcoming). Again, you're not locked into one platform for BC/DR like you would be with Exchange. In a BC/DR situation, do you really want to be messing with licensing keys and restrictions while you're trying to get your business back on its feet?

8) GroupWise Web Access uses Apache, which runs 2/3rds of the world's websites (source: Netcraft) - altho it can use Netscape's webserver and even IIS (e.g. a *choice*). Exchange's web-access component relies *exclusively* on IIS, the most-hacked webserver on the planet - and more single-vendor lock-in. For access, we see the same thing: GroupWise is fairly browser-agnostic, giving you a  *choice*, the freedom to select what is best for your business. Exchange locks you into IE, very deliberately.

In summary, from the business perspective, I think what you should be asking is which environment offers you the best range of options, and the ability to meet *future* needs, ones you probably can't predict right now, in a timely and cost-effective fashion; not just the needs you have today. Redmond's clear philosophy is to do everything possible to lock customers into their platform and products, and make sure that the customer has no choices and no ability to change without going through Redmond first.

And in the modern business environment, losing the ability to adapt and change freely is a crucial hobble for any organization where IT is a strategic asset. When a business need could arise tomorrow (or next month, or next year), and you can't predict the organizational and technology changes needed for your business to survive, is locking yourself into a single vendor (who can't read the future any better than you can) your best business move? If GroupWise has some technical problems, they can be fixed. But throwing the baby...and your ability to adapt and be flexible...out with the bathwater doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Darwin was almost right...its not necessarily the "strongest" that survive, its the most *adaptable*. Which environment lets  *you*  be adaptable?
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
Side comment - there is now a GroupWise TA (even though Those That Decide at E-E haven't yet decided to put links where they belong for it)

It's located under "Apps/Groupwise"
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
As to your Question - you will need to get Exchange 2003 Enterprise Server, because Standard still has a very tight space limit on the message store DB.  Your CEO will not be happy if he's the only one that can have anything in the message DB ;)
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
I should have said "you also have to buy a Windows user CAL."
0
 
Indy_IT_AdminAuthor Commented:
Okay so I am running XP Pro computers with MS Office 2003 (includes Outlook).  Are you saying that if I switch to Exchange  2003 that I have to buy another user cal in addition to the server CAL?
Total MS CALS = XP, WIN2K3, Office2K3, EXCH SVR, & EXCH CLIENT?

My understanding was beyond my computer (XP & Off 2k3) I would need a Server CAL & an Exchange CAL.  Server CAL for Domain Login and Exchange CAL for Outlook to authenticate with Exchange.
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
Well, if you already have a Windows server CAL, you don't have to get another one.  What I'm saying is in addition to the Exchange CAL you need a Windows server CAL in order to hook up Outlook to your server.

I was lumping together the total cost of going to Exchange from GroupWise.  If you already are fully CAL-ed for Windows 2000 Server, and you already have O2K3 licenses for everyone,  you only have to buy the Exchange CAL. (in addition to the Windows server license and the Exchange server license)

0
 
ShineOnCommented:
And, unless you subscribe to SA, you will have to pay full price all over again when you're forced to upgrade to Exchange 2006 on Longhorn...
0
 
Indy_IT_AdminAuthor Commented:
Okay. so if I understand correctly;

If you already have a Windows based computer (which most corps do) and you alread use any version of MS Office 2000 or later (Which most corps do) the you only have to purchase the CALS for Win SVR ($26.99/user)  and Exchange ($65/user).

If you choose to implement Novell don't you have to purchase a license for Netware ($79/user) and Groupwise ($105/user) if you are ?

From an upfront cost I don't buy the Novell Argument, however I am still digesting PsiCop's novel and hope to have some questions about that soon.
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
I thought you already had GroupWise 6.0.  An upgrade e-license to 6.5 is under $60 per user, and includes the server agents.  With Exchange, you also have to include the cost of the Exchange Server license(s) and the Windows 2000/2003 server license, plus the much higher implementation cost of doing a migration vs the cost of doing an upgrade of the same product.

It will cost your company more up-front to convert to Exchange 2003, not counting the cost of implementation of an Exchange 2003 environment.  If you put it off a couple of months, you can upgrade to GroupWise 7.0 instead.

Ongoing support costs for Exchange/Outlook is also higher than for GroupWise.  You also shoud consider the fact of Exchange/Outlook's historical vulnerabilities that GroupWise users and admins never had to worry about, and the ones that have yet to surface (and you know they will.)

There doesn't appear to me to be any business reason to do this.  It must be a personal whim of someone in your organization.
0
 
PsiCopCommented:
You seem to be overlooking the PER-SERVER charges. In the M$ environment, you have $27 (server CAL) PLUS $65 (Exchange CAL) PLUS whatever the per-user cost of the per-server/per-CPU charges works out to be for whatever number of servers, CPUs and users you have. The more physical servers you have, the more you're charged. And there are other charges lurking; for example, implementing clustering is an additional licensing charge, both for the server and the clustering software.

You think Bill Gates got to be as rich as he is by being nice when it came time to generate the invoice? Of course not. Once you've locked your company into their products, Redmond can charge pretty much whatever they want - you don't have any independence, all your systems are tied to one platform, one "directory service", one webserver, one browser, etc. You're 0wn3d, just as surely as if you were a naked Windoze box sitting on the 'Net.

For the Novell products, its strictly per-user (making IT cost planning a lot easier, by the way). There are no per-server charges. Unlike Windoze, where the OS license "lives and dies with the hardware", your Novell product licenses move as your change hardware - no need to REpurchase a server license just because you bought a replacement server. And you get things that Redmond charges extra for: 2-node clustering is INCLUDED with NetWare/OES and support for it is INCLUDED in GroupWise.

Ask Ernie Ball, Inc. how much they saved by dumping M$ entirely.
0
 
PsiCopCommented:
And ShineOn is right about the other costs.

Look at it this way. Go to a drug dealer, and the first few "hits" or whatever...the "upfront cost"...that's cheap. Free, even. And once you're hooked, the price goes up.

That's why looking at just the "upfront cost" when you make your comparison is a poor business strategy.

First, you need to look at ALL of your costs. Account for the fact that Novell's products typically take 1/2 to 1/3rd the hardware resources of the M$ equivalents. That means a higher capital outlay (to purchase more and/or heftier hardware), which also means a higher opportunity cost (those dollars could be doing something else for you). More and/or heftier hardware also means higher costs for support contracts, and another opportunity cost. The disparate management environment of Windoze (MMC is nothing but a shell that calls 30+ different and separate management tools, while the Novell environment offers you both integrated tools like ConsoleOne as well as centralized, web-based management like iManager) means more time devoted to routine administration tasks (an IT cost that is often overlooked). The joking nature of security in the Windoze environment means more downtime for users (with the associated cost to the business) and more IT staff time devoted to cleaning up virii, un-hijacking PCs, etc. (again, another cost often overlooked).

Second, consider costs over time. Look at the typical "migration" in a Windoze environment, which usually involves forklifts as opposed to being able to leverage existing hardware. Look at the terms of Licensing 6.0 and SA and the obligations to continually pay for the M$ products, vs. the *choice* in the Novell world to purchase/not purchase software maintenance. And then consider the possibilities of the future: personnel growth, business location expansion, new services that might be needed. What are the costs of doing these things or meeting these needs in the single vendor/OS/browser/webserver/platform environment as opposed to an environment that lets you choose.

Finally, consider the overall cost to your business of losing flexibility. That's harder to reckon, but there is a dollar value there.
0
All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.