Defragmentation duration
in [Microsoft Exchange]
|
Prev: Exchange 2003 - OWA - Japanese - weird issue
Next: 03 -> 07 transition probs: The component"Microsoft Exchange...
From: Christian on 16 Mar 2010 05:06 Hi all, On an Exchange 2007 SP1 server, I've moved some mailboxes to another mailbox database on another SG on the same server. But the source database didn't shrink at all, though a full backup was performed afterwards. According to the docs, it looks like I'll have to umount then run eseutil /D against it to get back some free space (35Gb according to eventid 1221). Is there any magic equation to have roughly the amount of time this operation will take ? The database to defragment is 180Gb. Thanks. Christian
From: Mark Arnold [MVP] on 16 Mar 2010 09:15 On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:06:15 +0100, "Christian" <cgregoir99(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >Hi all, > >On an Exchange 2007 SP1 server, I've moved some mailboxes to another mailbox >database on another SG on the same server. But the source database didn't >shrink at all, though a full backup was performed afterwards. According to >the docs, it looks like I'll have to umount then run eseutil /D against it >to get back some free space (35Gb according to eventid 1221). > >Is there any magic equation to have roughly the amount of time this >operation will take ? The database to defragment is 180Gb. > >Thanks. > >Christian > No. No. Do not defragment. Create another store and move everyone equally across the two. Then dismount and delete the original store. Exchange 2007 stores are perfectly fine at 100GB or more. You have no need what so ever to defrag that store.
From: Fritz on 16 Mar 2010 09:19 It's hard to tell because it depends on the following factors: 1. How badly fragmented the database is. If it's in 200 pieces then it won't take as long as if it it's in 95,000 pieces. 2. How fast the CPU and the RAM in your server are 3. The performance of your storage (RAID?) In any case, I'd plan to do this over a weekend. eseutil could litterally take all weekend to run even if you start on a Friday night. J. "Christian" <cgregoir99(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:hnnh71$rqg$1(a)writer.imaginet.fr... > Hi all, > > On an Exchange 2007 SP1 server, I've moved some mailboxes to another > mailbox database on another SG on the same server. But the source database > didn't shrink at all, though a full backup was performed afterwards. > According to the docs, it looks like I'll have to umount then run eseutil > /D against it to get back some free space (35Gb according to eventid > 1221). > > Is there any magic equation to have roughly the amount of time this > operation will take ? The database to defragment is 180Gb. > > Thanks. > > Christian >
From: Fritz on 16 Mar 2010 09:21 BTW. You could always quit if you notice that eseutil is taking too long to run. It shows you progress. J. "Christian" <cgregoir99(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:hnnh71$rqg$1(a)writer.imaginet.fr... > Hi all, > > On an Exchange 2007 SP1 server, I've moved some mailboxes to another > mailbox database on another SG on the same server. But the source database > didn't shrink at all, though a full backup was performed afterwards. > According to the docs, it looks like I'll have to umount then run eseutil > /D against it to get back some free space (35Gb according to eventid > 1221). > > Is there any magic equation to have roughly the amount of time this > operation will take ? The database to defragment is 180Gb. > > Thanks. > > Christian >
From: Christian on 16 Mar 2010 10:22
>>Hi all, >> >>On an Exchange 2007 SP1 server, I've moved some mailboxes to another >>mailbox >>database on another SG on the same server. But the source database didn't >>shrink at all, though a full backup was performed afterwards. According to >>the docs, it looks like I'll have to umount then run eseutil /D against it >>to get back some free space (35Gb according to eventid 1221). >> >>Is there any magic equation to have roughly the amount of time this >>operation will take ? The database to defragment is 180Gb. >> >>Thanks. >> >>Christian >> > No. > No. > Do not defragment. > Create another store and move everyone equally across the two. Then > dismount and delete the original store. Exchange 2007 stores are > perfectly fine at 100GB or more. > You have no need what so ever to defrag that store. That's what I plan : scater mailboxes among different SG/DB rather than only one SG. But I didn't expect the DB to not shrink. And the problem is that there isn't enough free space on disk, only 55Gb left. I have an external 270Gb USB drive but I'm not keen on temporarily using it for that purpose. What's your advice ? |