Using PST files on a network server 2

[Davetoo]

We're running E2K in a pure W2K environment using Outlook 2000. Our users store their e-mail in PST files that are located in their home folders on the network file server. It's been working with hardly any issues until lately when I've installed some new desktop stations.

The new computers are significantly faster than the ones they're replacing, so I think maybe that might be part of the "problem". Basically, when they have their Outlook open, accessing their PST file across the network, the systems will error out on the Outlook even when the users aren't working in Outlook, and the connection to the PST file will be lost. To get it working again, the user has to close Outlook, then open it back up and all is well. The error says it can't find the PST file on the users "X" drive, which is a network share. The thing is, the network from their desktop is functioning just fine.

I've found in the KB where Microsoft says that using PST files across the network isn't a good idea, but why would it have been working just fine for so long, only to have problems creep up when I setup faster machines?

Thanks.

 

[speedracercjr]

I don't know why it would be messing up, maybe the NIC drivers need to be updated? But my question is this. If you are running Exchange2K why don't you store their mail on the server in mailboxes instead of PST's??? Once those PST's get to large they start to get unstable.

 

[Davetoo]

Systems are all updated with current drivers, etc.

We use the PST files because there is no restriction on how much mail users can keep in their mailboxes, and because the majority of our users are at remote sites. If the link to us was broken, then they couldn't view any of their email (I know, use .OST files), but that runs into the first problem of users being permitted to have unlimited email storage. I couldn't convince the powers that be to set a limit, so this was the result. Otherwise we'd run smack into the 16GB limit.

 

[speedracercjr]

Its probably too late now but you could have went with the Enterprise version which has no limits barring the fact you have enough physical hard drive space. Maybe you should convice the powers that be that their PST files will become corrupt once they get to a certain size. Especially if they are flowing over a remote link. YIKES!!!

 

[Davetoo]

I tried, but they didn't want it, so now I have to make do.

The remote sites retrieve their mail from the remote Exchange server, but then store the PST files on a local (to them) file server. The problem actually came up at my local site, where the file server and exchange server are both located, and only after I installed faster systems (P4 1.8GHz and above).

 

[Marcs41]

Speedracer is more than right, you should never use PST's on a network.

After all, a PST in like a database and need constant access when used. This means potentially enormous traffic on the LAN and lots of file locks on the server.

Now, worse, they actually access that remotely? I am even surprised it worked for this long!
As the files grow and get fragmented, problems will occur. One of these days a user is gatanteed to get a complete corrupted PST and loose all mail. Then what are you going to do?
I don't know how many users you are talking about but to hit the 16Gig is already close to being absurd.
Mail is not a filemanagement system, so teach your users to archive old mail in a seperate PST, only to be accessed when needed. For regular daily use, use the Mailbox on the server, and when remote, have them connect with IMAP.
I also don't know to what degree you are in charge/responsible for IT, but if it is your job and responsibilty to cover the IT needs, you NEED to tell them it cannot be done without hazard and you CANNOT assume responsibility for them being stuborn and not wanting to accept the way the game is supposed to be played. Set up some IT policy and cover yourself in regard of the los of mail etc.
General rule in IT: if your a$$ is on the line, cover it!
Ok, that was my 'IT-manager' experience talking.

 

[Davetoo]

First, as I've said twice now, the users are not accessing their PST files remotely, i.e. across the WAN, but accessing them on their local file servers. Second, everyone is fully aware of the risks being taken with the PST files. Third, I tried to get them to do it differently, i.e. store their unused emails in PST's separate from their "working"mail at best. However, it was managements decision to allow the users to have the "freedom" that they have regarding mail, and there's nothing I can do about it other than backup the file servers every night in case a PST is lost. They are fully aware they can lose all of their email at any time, and we do not guarantee recovery.

Now, any chance we can sway this conversation back to the problem at hand? i.e. why are the fast computers losing the connection to the Outlook PST, while the older systems do not have that problem?

Thanks.

 

[Marcs41]

Ok, back the the problem if you want.
The problem comes from the same points raised here before.
It is a bad idea because of traffic etc.
A faster PC handles things faster and thus the LAN requests are faster too. This make the connection fail.
Basically, in this scenario, you are now facing the consequences of the 'bad idea'.
Your options:
- use slow PCs ;-)
- follow above and MS's recommendations (they were made for a reason!
- convince your management of the issues
- ... live with it

 

[Davetoo]

marcs41,

Ok...ok.. ;-).

If I put a smaller network cable on the faster computers, to effectively create a bottleneck at the NIC, do you think that would slow the traffic down enough to make them function properly?

(tongue firmly planted in cheek).

I think I'll approach management again and request we start following proper procedure with the email.

Thanks.

 

[Marcs41]

You may be kidding about smaller network cables, but you are actually not far of a (maybe) workaround!
Try with a problem PC to force the NIC to 10 Mbps instead of 100.

 

[speedracercjr]

What speed is the network file server on? If its on 10 can you get it on 100?? I can't see why a "faster" pc would have network problems unless the server was the bottlneck. Is it possible to put their PST's on the local computer and maybe create a script that puts a copy on the file server for backup?

 

[Davetoo]

The file server is connected directly to a 100 switch. We have about 85 users connected locally, but only about 10 or so that actively have their PST files open on an ongoing basis from the file server.

I'm working to test our alternatives right now. The problem with a script file is some users have PST files exceeding 200MB.

Thanks.

 

[speedracercjr]

Is it an option to back the file up on their pcs? What OS are they running? If its W2k or XP Pro they could just leave the PC on and leave it signed off that way you could run a backup?

 

[Davetoo]

Hmm..hadn't thought of that. Yes, it is an option available I suppose. I use Arcserve and all clients are W2K, so it could be done.

Thanks.

 

[speedracercjr]

In the mean time you need to smack management around and tell them to pull their heads out of their rears and get exchange!!!!!!!

 

[Marcs41]

Hold on a second, you mention switches!
Were those 10 users on switches before or just hubs?
Switches are know to disrupt traffic, it does not normally influence any transfer or acces to a dB, but a PST stays open all the time. If the switch breaks the connection for just a fraction, Outlook could loose the connection.
So, another test you could do is to put some of those 10 users on a Hub if you have one available.
I think it worth a try and it does not involve more then to swap a few cables.

 

[Davetoo]

They've been on switches I believe, I'd have to double check. I do have a spare hub that I could install, and ironically it's a 10mb one. I'll see what happens.

See, this turned out to be a fruitfuls discussion after all! lol

Thanks.

 

[Marcs41]

Those discussions are the most challenging ones, haha.

 

[EdwardWStanley]

I think your problem is the 10mb hub or switch .. especially with the high speed cards .. I'm betting if you replace the hubs with higher speed 100 mb one your problems will go away... now I will ...


estanley@eoeminolta.com

 

[Davetoo]

Don't have any 10mb hubs, all 10/100 auto-sensers.