| Author |
Message |
BigMike044
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:55 am Post subject:
Outlook 2003 Autoarchive not working |
|
|
Does anyone have any suggestions on my my autoarchive is not archiving emails
unless I manually go in and move them. For some reason, the feature is
turned on, and set to archive every 7 days, but it is not doing so
automatically. I have gone and remamed the pst file and created another one,
I have SP1 Installed, anyone with any suggestions would be greatly
appreciated.
Thanks Mike
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Jan 12, 2005 7:51 am Post subject:
Re: Outlook 2003 Autoarchive not working |
|
|
BigMike044 wrote:
| Quote: | Does anyone have any suggestions on my my autoarchive is not
archiving emails unless I manually go in and move them. For some
reason, the feature is turned on, and set to archive every 7 days,
but it is not doing so automatically. I have gone and remamed the
pst file and created another one, I have SP1 Installed, anyone with
any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks Mike
|
Note that autoarchive is based on the date an item was *modified*. That
could explain what's going on in your situation.
Sure you want to use PST files rather than keeping important data on the
Exchange server? I wouldn't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JeffG
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Jan 12, 2005 10:18 pm Post subject:
Re: Outlook 2003 Autoarchive not working |
|
|
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:51:25 -0500, "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
<lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmail.atyahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | BigMike044 wrote:
Does anyone have any suggestions on my my autoarchive is not
archiving emails unless I manually go in and move them. For some
reason, the feature is turned on, and set to archive every 7 days,
but it is not doing so automatically. I have gone and remamed the
pst file and created another one, I have SP1 Installed, anyone with
any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks Mike
Note that autoarchive is based on the date an item was *modified*. That
could explain what's going on in your situation.
Sure you want to use PST files rather than keeping important data on the
Exchange server? I wouldn't.
|
I keep hearing this from you Lanwench - don't you people have any
mailbox limits at all? I've got many end users with several GB of
"important data" in PST files, and there's no way I would put all of
that crap on the mail server - even if the machine itself would have
the space for it all, how in the world would you ever complete a mail
system backup within reasonable time limits and without a host of tape
drives?
I'm just curious, I don't doubt the wisdom of keeping it on the server
- but out here, most of us have had to use some sort of limitations on
the server...
Interested in hearing your response.
JeffG
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Jan 12, 2005 11:39 pm Post subject:
Re: Outlook 2003 Autoarchive not working |
|
|
JeffG wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:51:25 -0500, "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmail.atyahoo.com> wrote:
BigMike044 wrote:
Does anyone have any suggestions on my my autoarchive is not
archiving emails unless I manually go in and move them. For some
reason, the feature is turned on, and set to archive every 7 days,
but it is not doing so automatically. I have gone and remamed the
pst file and created another one, I have SP1 Installed, anyone with
any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks Mike
Note that autoarchive is based on the date an item was *modified*.
That could explain what's going on in your situation.
Sure you want to use PST files rather than keeping important data on
the Exchange server? I wouldn't.
I keep hearing this from you Lanwench - don't you people have any
mailbox limits at all? I've got many end users with several GB of
"important data" in PST files, and there's no way I would put all of
that crap on the mail server - even if the machine itself would have
the space for it all, how in the world would you ever complete a mail
system backup within reasonable time limits and without a host of tape
drives?
|
Well, how are you planning to back up the PST files themselves? If they
contain important data, and you're expected to support it, they need to be
included in your backup strategy, right?
And since you can't reasonably store them on/access them from a file server
(they must be locally stored), are you planning to do workstation backups?
Even if you were to put them on the server, you'd still be increasing your
backup "footprint" - and in fact, it would be larger than if you hadn't
moved it out to PST files as that breaks single instance storage.
I'll ignore the "you people" comment, thanks. :|
| Quote: |
I'm just curious, I don't doubt the wisdom of keeping it on the server
- but out here, most of us have had to use some sort of limitations on
the server...
|
Of course - so do all my clients. They just have to decide on their own
policy what is to be supported and kept 'live'. If it isn't important enough
to keep on the server (note that you also have the public store to work with
for storage - many companies don't make use of this...) I don't know that
it's worth keeping at all.
People are pack rats. You know that, everyone knows that - and mailbox
quotas are a fact of life. If the mailbox store(s) and/or public folder
store(s) don't suffice, and your company can't afford Exchange Enterprise
and the backup capacity to support it (or additional Exchange servers & the
same for backup), perhaps they need to re-consider how much
(Exchange-related) data they need or want to maintain at all. I explain to
managers/company owners that if they care about the data, it needs to stay
on the server, in the mailbox. I have run into too many users who have lost
data because of autoarchive, and PST files in general - and this tends to
irk them, to say the least.
You might want to see
http://www.exchangefaq.org/faq/Exchange-5.5/Why-PST-=-BAD-/q/Why-PST-=-BAD/qid/1209
| Quote: |
Interested in hearing your response.
JeffG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JeffG
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Jan 13, 2005 1:09 am Post subject:
Re: Outlook 2003 Autoarchive not working |
|
|
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:39:51 -0500, "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
<lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmail.atyahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | JeffG wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:51:25 -0500, "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmail.atyahoo.com> wrote:
BigMike044 wrote:
Does anyone have any suggestions on my my autoarchive is not
archiving emails unless I manually go in and move them. For some
reason, the feature is turned on, and set to archive every 7 days,
but it is not doing so automatically. I have gone and remamed the
pst file and created another one, I have SP1 Installed, anyone with
any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks Mike
Note that autoarchive is based on the date an item was *modified*.
That could explain what's going on in your situation.
Sure you want to use PST files rather than keeping important data on
the Exchange server? I wouldn't.
I keep hearing this from you Lanwench - don't you people have any
mailbox limits at all? I've got many end users with several GB of
"important data" in PST files, and there's no way I would put all of
that crap on the mail server - even if the machine itself would have
the space for it all, how in the world would you ever complete a mail
system backup within reasonable time limits and without a host of tape
drives?
Well, how are you planning to back up the PST files themselves? If they
contain important data, and you're expected to support it, they need to be
included in your backup strategy, right?
|
My strategy is slightly different than yours - my users have been
informed of the dangers of local storage, and I DON'T back them up nor
do I intend on doing so (except for a few exceptions as below). I
have made them all aware that what is within the limits and in their
mailboxes is backed up, and the rest isn't, outside of the mail system
is unsupported and "at your own risk", and that anything they HAVE to
have, needs to be kept in their mail folders for safekeeping.
That is not the same as telling them they can't keep anything that's
beyond their storage limits at all. Our company has a major case of
(possibly well-deserved) "CYA Syndrome"... I don't mean to even
pretend that it actually IS important data...
| Quote: | And since you can't reasonably store them on/access them from a file server
(they must be locally stored), are you planning to do workstation backups?
Even if you were to put them on the server, you'd still be increasing your
backup "footprint" - and in fact, it would be larger than if you hadn't
moved it out to PST files as that breaks single instance storage.
|
Can you explain why you can't "reasonably store them on/from a file
server?" They absolutely do not "must be locally stored"... Not
saying it's a good idea, but for a few high-ranking officers of the
company, I have them in their user drives on the network. Of course,
they also share a LAN segment with sparse activity and high-speed
access to the file server...
At one time, I simply excluded these people from the mailbox
limtations, but that just encouraged the packrat syndrome... These
server-side PST's, BTW, are actually backed up - again, preferential
treatment...
And, FYI, we have a backup "solution" that never has been able to get
the single-instance storage working correctly for Exchange 2003. We
upgraded last year and their technical people are supposedly still
looking for the reason why it doesn't work in our shop.
| Quote: |
I'll ignore the "you people" comment, thanks. :|
|
Roger that, no offense meant of course!
| Quote: |
I'm just curious, I don't doubt the wisdom of keeping it on the server
- but out here, most of us have had to use some sort of limitations on
the server...
Of course - so do all my clients. They just have to decide on their own
policy what is to be supported and kept 'live'. If it isn't important enough
to keep on the server (note that you also have the public store to work with
for storage - many companies don't make use of this...) I don't know that
it's worth keeping at all.
People are pack rats. You know that, everyone knows that - and mailbox
quotas are a fact of life. If the mailbox store(s) and/or public folder
store(s) don't suffice, and your company can't afford Exchange Enterprise
and the backup capacity to support it (or additional Exchange servers & the
same for backup),
|
I'm still in shock that we actually upgraded from Exchange 5.0, quite
frankly. If the companys' hand hadn't been forced by support
termination of the OS and mail servers, along with a rampant fear of
viruses and security patches being unavailable, they would quite
happily have kept NT/EX5. In other words, we're pretty lucky to have
upgraded at all - and it took lots of arguing to get it, believe me.
| Quote: | perhaps they need to re-consider how much
(Exchange-related) data they need or want to maintain at all. I explain to
managers/company owners that if they care about the data, it needs to stay
on the server, in the mailbox. I have run into too many users who have lost
data because of autoarchive, and PST files in general - and this tends to
irk them, to say the least.
|
Sure, if/when it crashes they get irked - but not as irked as my users
would be if I told them they could ONLY have what space that is
available to them on the mail server...
I agree with every point - however, the trade-off is if you train an
end user on PST management, especially with the improvements found in
OL2003, they aren't too bad to keep up with, and it beats telling an
end user "you absolutely can NOT packrat beyond the limits I have
arbitrarily set for you..."
| Quote: |
Interested in hearing your response.
JeffG
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Jan 13, 2005 6:33 am Post subject:
Re: Outlook 2003 Autoarchive not working |
|
|
JeffG wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:39:51 -0500, "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmail.atyahoo.com> wrote:
JeffG wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:51:25 -0500, "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmail.atyahoo.com> wrote:
BigMike044 wrote:
Does anyone have any suggestions on my my autoarchive is not
archiving emails unless I manually go in and move them. For some
reason, the feature is turned on, and set to archive every 7
days, but it is not doing so automatically. I have gone and
remamed the pst file and created another one, I have SP1
Installed, anyone with any suggestions would be greatly
appreciated.
Thanks Mike
Note that autoarchive is based on the date an item was *modified*.
That could explain what's going on in your situation.
Sure you want to use PST files rather than keeping important data
on the Exchange server? I wouldn't.
I keep hearing this from you Lanwench - don't you people have any
mailbox limits at all? I've got many end users with several GB of
"important data" in PST files, and there's no way I would put all of
that crap on the mail server - even if the machine itself would have
the space for it all, how in the world would you ever complete a
mail system backup within reasonable time limits and without a host
of tape drives?
Well, how are you planning to back up the PST files themselves? If
they contain important data, and you're expected to support it, they
need to be included in your backup strategy, right?
My strategy is slightly different than yours - my users have been
informed of the dangers of local storage, and I DON'T back them up nor
do I intend on doing so (except for a few exceptions as below). I
have made them all aware that what is within the limits and in their
mailboxes is backed up, and the rest isn't, outside of the mail system
is unsupported and "at your own risk", and that anything they HAVE to
have, needs to be kept in their mail folders for safekeeping.
That is not the same as telling them they can't keep anything that's
beyond their storage limits at all. Our company has a major case of
(possibly well-deserved) "CYA Syndrome"... I don't mean to even
pretend that it actually IS important data...
|
OK - that's your call, of course. I just know from my own experience that at
some point, it is likely that someone way high up on the food chain will
lose some data....and it won't be fun, even if it was "in violation of
written company policy" that it was stored in a PST file...
| Quote: |
And since you can't reasonably store them on/access them from a file
server (they must be locally stored), are you planning to do
workstation backups? Even if you were to put them on the server,
you'd still be increasing your backup "footprint" - and in fact, it
would be larger than if you hadn't moved it out to PST files as that
breaks single instance storage.
Can you explain why you can't "reasonably store them on/from a file
server?" They absolutely do not "must be locally stored"... Not
saying it's a good idea, but for a few high-ranking officers of the
company, I have them in their user drives on the network. Of course,
they also share a LAN segment with sparse activity and high-speed
access to the file server...
|
Well, you can do it, and you've been lucky. But it isn't supported by
Microsoft - and generally leads to problems. Performance, for one (esp. with
large files) and possible data corruption. I've seen both happen....makes me
too nervous to do this myself outside of a three-person company without an
internal mailserver.
See "Personal folder files are unsupported over a LAN or over a WAN link" --
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=297019
| Quote: |
At one time, I simply excluded these people from the mailbox
limtations, but that just encouraged the packrat syndrome...
|
Yep.
| Quote: | These
server-side PST's, BTW, are actually backed up - again, preferential
treatment...
|
OK - but make sure Outlook is completely closed on the client - really only
know for sure if they've logged out of the domain entirely. If outlook.exe
is running in the background, the server PST file ain't getting backed up.
| Quote: |
And, FYI, we have a backup "solution" that never has been able to get
the single-instance storage working correctly for Exchange 2003. We
upgraded last year and their technical people are supposedly still
looking for the reason why it doesn't work in our shop.
|
Who's "their" technical people? MS? What makes you think it isn't working?
Are you using Standard? If you're using Enterprise, are you using multiple
mail stores? SIS works only on a per-store level, note...
| Quote: |
I'll ignore the "you people" comment, thanks. :|
Roger that, no offense meant of course!
|
<g> You work in IT. You know how it sounds. "What the ____ did you people do
in here over the weekend? My icons are three millimeters to the left of
where they should be." --Irate User
| Quote: |
I'm just curious, I don't doubt the wisdom of keeping it on the
server - but out here, most of us have had to use some sort of
limitations on the server...
Of course - so do all my clients. They just have to decide on their
own policy what is to be supported and kept 'live'. If it isn't
important enough to keep on the server (note that you also have the
public store to work with for storage - many companies don't make
use of this...) I don't know that it's worth keeping at all.
People are pack rats. You know that, everyone knows that - and
mailbox quotas are a fact of life. If the mailbox store(s) and/or
public folder store(s) don't suffice, and your company can't afford
Exchange Enterprise and the backup capacity to support it (or
additional Exchange servers & the same for backup),
I'm still in shock that we actually upgraded from Exchange 5.0, quite
frankly. If the companys' hand hadn't been forced by support
termination of the OS and mail servers, along with a rampant fear of
viruses and security patches being unavailable, they would quite
happily have kept NT/EX5. In other words, we're pretty lucky to have
upgraded at all - and it took lots of arguing to get it, believe me.
|
Yep. I think most of us have been there...
| Quote: |
perhaps they need to re-consider how much
(Exchange-related) data they need or want to maintain at all. I
explain to managers/company owners that if they care about the data,
it needs to stay on the server, in the mailbox. I have run into too
many users who have lost data because of autoarchive, and PST files
in general - and this tends to irk them, to say the least.
Sure, if/when it crashes they get irked - but not as irked as my users
would be if I told them they could ONLY have what space that is
available to them on the mail server...
|
This is why you need to make sure you have a very good relationship with
your very intelligent manager.
I don't know about that - unless you say "Neither I or the company will be
held responsible for any data that is not stored in your mailbox. So if you
lose something, don't even bother mentioning it."
It may help to wear good track shoes.
| Quote: |
Interested in hearing your response.
JeffG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JeffG
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:24 pm Post subject:
Re: Outlook 2003 Autoarchive not working |
|
|
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:33:42 -0500, "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
<lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmail.atyahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Can you explain why you can't "reasonably store them on/from a file
server?" They absolutely do not "must be locally stored"... Not
saying it's a good idea, but for a few high-ranking officers of the
company, I have them in their user drives on the network. Of course,
they also share a LAN segment with sparse activity and high-speed
access to the file server...
Well, you can do it, and you've been lucky. But it isn't supported by
Microsoft - and generally leads to problems. Performance, for one (esp. with
large files) and possible data corruption. I've seen both happen....makes me
too nervous to do this myself outside of a three-person company without an
internal mailserver.
See "Personal folder files are unsupported over a LAN or over a WAN link" --
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=297019
|
Thanks for the info, I will take this into advisement. Sometimes it's
hard to find the time to do things the right way, or even research to
find out what the best way around an issue is. But I'm also very
aware that the trade-off for that is having to fix it later...
| Quote: |
And, FYI, we have a backup "solution" that never has been able to get
the single-instance storage working correctly for Exchange 2003. We
upgraded last year and their technical people are supposedly still
looking for the reason why it doesn't work in our shop.
Who's "their" technical people? MS? What makes you think it isn't working?
Are you using Standard? If you're using Enterprise, are you using multiple
mail stores? SIS works only on a per-store level, note...
|
Yes, it is Standard Edition. Nope, not MS Tech - Veritas or Symantec
or whoever owns the "Backup Exec" stuff now. The software errors out
when "enable SI-storage" is selected and doesn't back anything up in
Exchange, so I disabled it and moved on. Frankly, I've been so busy
with other migration tasks I haven't taken the time to play with it
myself to find my problem... I guess I better get back on that
back-burner project...
| Quote: |
I'll ignore the "you people" comment, thanks. :|
Roger that, no offense meant of course!
g> You work in IT. You know how it sounds. "What the ____ did you people do
in here over the weekend? My icons are three millimeters to the left of
where they should be." --Irate User
|
Have you been reading my email? ;-)
| Quote: | OL2003, they aren't too bad to keep up with, and it beats telling an
end user "you absolutely can NOT packrat beyond the limits I have
arbitrarily set for you..."
I don't know about that - unless you say "Neither I or the company will be
held responsible for any data that is not stored in your mailbox. So if you
lose something, don't even bother mentioning it."
It may help to wear good track shoes.
|
I think the track shoes is a given in this business. I'm also
considering an excercise program and cutting down on the beers -
because as you know, shoes alone won't do much to increase your speed.
Thanks for the lively discussion, Lanwench!! Those of us in the
trenches appreciate your time and effort in these groups.
JeffG |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Jan 13, 2005 8:35 pm Post subject:
Re: Outlook 2003 Autoarchive not working |
|
|
JeffG wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:33:42 -0500, "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmail.atyahoo.com> wrote:
Can you explain why you can't "reasonably store them on/from a file
server?" They absolutely do not "must be locally stored"... Not
saying it's a good idea, but for a few high-ranking officers of the
company, I have them in their user drives on the network. Of
course, they also share a LAN segment with sparse activity and
high-speed access to the file server...
Well, you can do it, and you've been lucky. But it isn't supported by
Microsoft - and generally leads to problems. Performance, for one
(esp. with large files) and possible data corruption. I've seen both
happen....makes me too nervous to do this myself outside of a
three-person company without an internal mailserver.
See "Personal folder files are unsupported over a LAN or over a WAN
link" -- http://support.microsoft.com/?id=297019
Thanks for the info, I will take this into advisement. Sometimes it's
hard to find the time to do things the right way, or even research to
find out what the best way around an issue is. But I'm also very
aware that the trade-off for that is having to fix it later...
|
Yep.
| Quote: |
And, FYI, we have a backup "solution" that never has been able to
get the single-instance storage working correctly for Exchange
2003. We upgraded last year and their technical people are
supposedly still looking for the reason why it doesn't work in our
shop.
Who's "their" technical people? MS? What makes you think it isn't
working? Are you using Standard? If you're using Enterprise, are you
using multiple mail stores? SIS works only on a per-store level,
note...
Yes, it is Standard Edition. Nope, not MS Tech - Veritas or Symantec
or whoever owns the "Backup Exec" stuff now. The software errors out
when "enable SI-storage" is selected and doesn't back anything up in
Exchange, so I disabled it and moved on. Frankly, I've been so busy
with other migration tasks I haven't taken the time to play with it
myself to find my problem... I guess I better get back on that
back-burner project...
|
I'm not sure exactly what Backup Exec means by that checkbox, but it has to
do only with your backups - Exchange *is* using SIS, itself.
| Quote: |
I'll ignore the "you people" comment, thanks. :|
Roger that, no offense meant of course!
g> You work in IT. You know how it sounds. "What the ____ did you
people do in here over the weekend? My icons are three millimeters
to the left of where they should be." --Irate User
Have you been reading my email? ;-)
|
Yes, of course.
| Quote: |
OL2003, they aren't too bad to keep up with, and it beats telling an
end user "you absolutely can NOT packrat beyond the limits I have
arbitrarily set for you..."
I don't know about that - unless you say "Neither I or the company
will be held responsible for any data that is not stored in your
mailbox. So if you lose something, don't even bother mentioning it."
It may help to wear good track shoes.
I think the track shoes is a given in this business. I'm also
considering an excercise program and cutting down on the beers -
because as you know, shoes alone won't do much to increase your speed.
Thanks for the lively discussion, Lanwench!! Those of us in the
trenches appreciate your time and effort in these groups.
JeffG
|
Thanks. I'm in the trenches too - but I have a laptop & wireless connection
down here, and a decent coffeemaker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in