?
Solved

Exchange 2013 Available Database Capacity < Total Quota Limits

Posted on 2014-03-04
6
Medium Priority
?
356 Views
Last Modified: 2014-03-05
Is it possible to create mailbox databases in Exchange 2013 that are less than the total quota limits of the mailboxes within?

Here is the situation:  we are a smaller organization about to upgrade from E2007 to E2013.  Our current mailbox database (we only have one) is 144GB.  Because of this, our storage capacity on our new Exchange server is over 800GB, which we thought would be more than enough.  However, we offer 2GB storage quotas, and have 556 mailboxes, so the Exchange Server Role Requirements Calculator is spitting out a requirements of over 1.1TB for database storage alone, and that is after decreasing the quota on most of the mailboxes to just 1GB.

I realize we did this backwards, and I would like to not to replace a bunch of drives on a brand new server.  Because we know that most mailboxes won't ever use 2GB storage (the average mailbox size is < 250MB), is it possible to have mailbox databases that technically don't have enough storage for everyone to fill their quota?  Would it be a huge mistake to go that route, even if it is technically feasible?

Thanks in advance for your help.
0
Comment
Question by:ejscn
  • 3
  • 2
6 Comments
 
LVL 63

Accepted Solution

by:
Simon Butler (Sembee) earned 1600 total points
ID: 39905867
Exchange doesn't care what the quota is or even look at the number of mailboxes. It will have no impact on the configuration of the server. The calculator is just that, and it works on the worst case scenario which is everyone using the maximum of their allowed quota, hence the storage required. In reality, you will not have all users using all of the space allowed.

Simon.
0
 
LVL 11

Assisted Solution

by:hecgomrec
hecgomrec earned 400 total points
ID: 39906528
I agree with Simon, the calculator multiplies the amount of mailboxes by the quota and that's why you get 1.2 TB of hard drive.


Now, you mentioned 1 Database and 556 mailboxes.  Please consider to spread out your mailboxes into more databases.  In case of failure it will be easy for you to recover the missing info and having databases to group departments, branches, etc. helps to speed up maintenance.

Imagine having everything in one hard drive that fails... the whole organization will suffer but if you split the databases and even put them in different hard drives only those on the affected drive will be affected the rest will continue working.

Also, if you keep too many logs files the amount of space increases.
0
 

Author Comment

by:ejscn
ID: 39906631
Thank you both for your help.  

Hecgomrec,  Our new server has 6 drives in a RAID 10 array that we were planning on partitioning into 10 drives - one for each database and log file.  We were only planning on using 4 databases and having a spare partition in case it's needed.  Would it be better to have separate physical discs for each database and log file?
0
What does it mean to be "Always On"?

Is your cloud always on? With an Always On cloud you won't have to worry about downtime for maintenance or software application code updates, ensuring that your bottom line isn't affected.

 
LVL 11

Expert Comment

by:hecgomrec
ID: 39906718
Planning... Planning!!!!


I personally have never created such a logical partition. I will create 3 RAIDs and 1 partition per logical drive.  In case of hardware failure (dead HD) it is pointless to have more than 1 partition they will be all affected.

I usually don't put more stress on the HD other than necessary, too many logical divisions on a virtual arrangement can open a door for failure and reduce performance.

Also, think about the following:  You had everything in 1 database before, how were you prepared for disaster?.  Will you better prepared this time just by having 3 HD and more databases to split the mailboxes?.

Again, every scenario is different and the way each IT person decide how to handle performance, functionality and recovery is also different.

My recommendation, base your decision on desire hard disk performance and fault tolerance you can afford and how much you trust and your backup plan.
0
 

Author Comment

by:ejscn
ID: 39906731
Thank you.  And agreed on the planning.  This is my first time moving to a new version of Exchange, and I made some assumptions I should not have made when purchasing the new server.  Thank you very much for your advice.
0
 
LVL 11

Expert Comment

by:hecgomrec
ID: 39906934
Is always a pleasure to help and pass knowledge.
0

Featured Post

Technology Partners: We Want Your Opinion!

We value your feedback.

Take our survey and automatically be enter to win anyone of the following:
Yeti Cooler, Amazon eGift Card, and Movie eGift Card!

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

This article describes Top 9 Exchange troubleshooting utilities that every Exchange Administrator should know. Most of the utilities are available free of cost. List of tools that I am going to explain in this article are:   Microsoft Remote Con…
In this post, we will learn to set up the Group Naming policy and will see how it is going to impact the Display Name and the Email addresses of the Group.
To show how to create a transport rule in Exchange 2013. We show this process by using the Exchange Admin Center. Log into Exchange Admin Center.: First we need to log into the Exchange Admin Center. Navigate to the Mail Flow >> Rules tab.:  To cr…
how to add IIS SMTP to handle application/Scanner relays into office 365.
Suggested Courses

578 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question