Archived email (.pst) when working from home

[Sippitts]

All,
Don't know if this is possible, but the powers that be want to know so here goes.

We archive off our email to PST files via GPO, these files are stored on a T drive (network share). This is fine when the users are in the office but laptop users get the "unable to find ***.pst" error message when out and about. This is expected, however, is there a way to suppress this error message whilst the user isn't on our network?

Thanks for your help.
Merry christmas

 

[Grenage]

You could run a VBS script at boot time on the laptops. It could check if the PST network path was available, and if it wasn't then it could remove the PST from the list of data sources (assuming the data sources are stored in a registry or config file).

That or it map a local folder with a blank PST to mimic the same path, using SUBST or the like.

"We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area" - Major Mike Shearer

 

[Sippitts]

Thanks for the fast response. I had thought about script but wondered if there was an easier way first.

I'll have a play with a script and post how I get on, if you do think of a different way then let us know.

Thanks again.

 

[Grenage]

Will do; there are plenty of knowledgeable folks around here, so one might have a much simpler solution for you.

I've had to resort to VBS scripts for similar tasks before.

"We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area" - Major Mike Shearer

 

[58sniper]

We archive off our email to PST files

Sorry to hear that.

via GPO, these files are stored on a T drive (network share).

Just as an FYI, that's not only NOT supported by Microsoft, but openly discouraged by them

This is fine when the users are in the office but laptop users get the "unable to find ***.pst" error message when out and about. This is expected, however, is there a way to suppress this error message whilst the user isn't on our network?

No. You'd be better off ingesting the .pst files back into the mail server. Use this logic: you're removing mail from one drive (mail server) to put it on another drive (network share). What's that doing? You've lost single instance storing, AV scanning, etc. Email in .pst files takes more room than in the server. You run into compression issues, etc. The list goes on and on. You also can't see .pst files from the web based email (if your server supports that).

Pat Richard MVP
Plan for performance, and capacity takes care of itself. Plan for capacity, and suffer poor performance.

http://www.ucblogs.net/blogs/exchange/

 

[molecul3]

Hi sniper,

I am pretty new to this and as far as some places I have worked for, it has been common practice to offload some mails off the exchange server for a particular user who has a large mailbox size to his/her local drive or to a networked drive.

If the above is not the case, what is the recommended practice or "Microsoft" solution for managing large mailboxes?

Hope you can shed some light.
Thank you

 

[58sniper]

So I'll ask what the advantage is to archiving mail out of the mail server? You lose single instance storage, messages take more space in a .pst than in the mailbox, etc.

You don't mention the size of the mailbox, but I've seen users with 50+GB mailboxes in Exchange.

However, the problem generally isn't a technological one. It's a behavioral one. Rarely does someone NEED a mailbox that's really big. Users shouldn't be using a mailbox as a filing cabinet for attachments (especially 38 versions of the same file). Once they get around that, mailbox sizes shrink drastically.

Using a third party archiving solution provides a lot of advantages over anything built into Exchange and/or Outlook.

Pat Richard MVP
Plan for performance, and capacity takes care of itself. Plan for capacity, and suffer poor performance.

http://www.ucblogs.net/blogs/exchange/

 

[molecul3]

Understood. I agree that many users with large mailboxes do not really manage their mailboxes very well and just expect things to work.

But would archiving off to local disk/network share be the most "cost-effective" solution to free-ing up disk space on an exchange server for a small company not willing to upgrade?

Typically they would archive emails that are dated and will hardly if ever be looked at again.

 

[58sniper]

for a small company not willing to upgrade?

Do they want to not upgrade or have archives? It's either/or. Archiving to a .pst on the local drive is the only supported solution without going to third party solutions. pst files on network shares aren't supported, and shouldn't be considered.

If they archive using something like .pst files, then discovery as a result of legal action gets real "fun". As does AV scanning, network issues, corruption, access from the outside/phones, etc. Then you've got issues with those .pst files getting too big, migrating them during upgrades, losing them during hardware failures, etc.

Pat Richard MVP
Plan for performance, and capacity takes care of itself. Plan for capacity, and suffer poor performance.

http://www.ucblogs.net/blogs/exchange/

 

[molecul3]

Hi Pat,

Yes, there is always going to be a long list of risks as you mentioned. I guess this is one area that is always going to scratch heads and generate long discussions.

Thanks Patt.