Exchange Server 2013 email archiving caveats and limitation ?
Hi People,
Does anyone here know what is the limitation and the caveats / pitfall that we need to aware when using the Microsoft Exchange Server 2013 build in archiving solution as oppose to use the 3rd party application, in this case Symantec Enterprise Vault v11 ?
In my current case, I'm using Exchange Server 2007 and EV v9, it works well, but somehow Microsoft Exchange Server 2013 already got builtin email archiving feature with no additional license. So I wonder what I should be aware of before decommissioning the Enterprise Vault and using the native builtin email archiving of Exchange Server.
Any thoughts and comment would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Does anyone here know what is the limitation and the caveats / pitfall that we need to aware when using the Microsoft Exchange Server 2013 build in archiving solution as oppose to use the 3rd party application, in this case Symantec Enterprise Vault v11 ?
In my current case, I'm using Exchange Server 2007 and EV v9, it works well, but somehow Microsoft Exchange Server 2013 already got builtin email archiving feature with no additional license. So I wonder what I should be aware of before decommissioning the Enterprise Vault and using the native builtin email archiving of Exchange Server.
Any thoughts and comment would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Thank you !
ASKER
Does this means that by using the built-in archiving function in Exchange Server 2013, the user outlook mailbox access speed and response should perform faster than using the 3rd party archive, in this case Enterprise Vault ?
Not always.
If the server the third party tool is using for its database is decent spec then it can sometimes be faster to find through that. Something SQL backed is probably quicker at finding an individual message, but the native archiving product could be better for doing thread review. There is no one answer.
Simon.
If the server the third party tool is using for its database is decent spec then it can sometimes be faster to find through that. Something SQL backed is probably quicker at finding an individual message, but the native archiving product could be better for doing thread review. There is no one answer.
Simon.
ASKER
I'm using 2007 and trying to do Exchange Server 2013 coexistence migration, why do I need to migrate to 2010 and then 2013 ?
The reason we are using EV was:
1. To relieve the disk space from the SAN into lower cost storage appliance (so instead of using EMC VNX disk LUN, the archived email can be stored in EMC DataDomain which supports compression and Encryption).
2. In case we need to search the email for some investigation, we have to look the email from the EVJournal mailbox.
3. Stubbing.... with the current Exchange 2007 and EV 9 setup, the old email is converted into placeholder and the actual email body is stored in EV archived mailbox in EMC DataDomain, therefore the mailbox size is manageable. So can Exchange Server 2013 do similar thing to reduce the active mailbox size ?