sglee
asked on
Running Outlook in Cache model or not
Hi,
I have SBS2011/Exchange Server 2010 and Outlook 2013.
I have been enabling Cache mode whenever I set up Outlook on user computers for safety just in case Exchange Server (20 mailbox database > 200GB in size) crashes or not available for extended period of time.
The downside of that is, from time to time, local copy username@domain.com.OST file gets corrupted as some user mailbox size exceeds 20GB. (I know max size for OST is 50GB) Sometimes it takes a long time to open Outlook (maybe because Outlook has to sync its local contents against Exchange Server before opening Outlook?).
Whenever the problem occurs, I simply delete existing OST file and re-open Outlook so that new OST is created. The inconvenience is that users complain that they can't perform search until indexing to complete.
When you perform a search in Outlook, does it make a difference whether Outlook is running in Cache mode or not?
I just like to get know how other experts are managing Outlook data.
Thanks.
I have SBS2011/Exchange Server 2010 and Outlook 2013.
I have been enabling Cache mode whenever I set up Outlook on user computers for safety just in case Exchange Server (20 mailbox database > 200GB in size) crashes or not available for extended period of time.
The downside of that is, from time to time, local copy username@domain.com.OST file gets corrupted as some user mailbox size exceeds 20GB. (I know max size for OST is 50GB) Sometimes it takes a long time to open Outlook (maybe because Outlook has to sync its local contents against Exchange Server before opening Outlook?).
Whenever the problem occurs, I simply delete existing OST file and re-open Outlook so that new OST is created. The inconvenience is that users complain that they can't perform search until indexing to complete.
When you perform a search in Outlook, does it make a difference whether Outlook is running in Cache mode or not?
I just like to get know how other experts are managing Outlook data.
Thanks.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
For larger mailboxes like that I recommend using exchange archive mailboxes so most of the historic data will be on a different secondary mailbox for each user. searching on outlook will automatically be done on both mailboxes but only the primary mailbox containing the latest data will be cached.
ASKER
@DeBlackman
"I recommend using exchange archive mailboxes" --> can you be more specific?
Are you talking about creating another mailbox for those users with mailbox size over 50GB?
For example, if the main mailbox name is "John Doe", another mailbox name would be "John Doe Archive" and set it up so that "John Doe" can access "John Doe Archive" account in Outlook?
"I recommend using exchange archive mailboxes" --> can you be more specific?
Are you talking about creating another mailbox for those users with mailbox size over 50GB?
For example, if the main mailbox name is "John Doe", another mailbox name would be "John Doe Archive" and set it up so that "John Doe" can access "John Doe Archive" account in Outlook?
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
@DeBlackman
I have not had time to try "exchange 2010 introduced archive mailboxes that basically replace using pst files", but I will try your suggestion in coming days and post results.
I have not had time to try "exchange 2010 introduced archive mailboxes that basically replace using pst files", but I will try your suggestion in coming days and post results.
ASKER
Solutions provided.
ASKER
Do you archive some and backup those archive PST files from local HD to the network/file server?