 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Server Forum / Exchange Server / Design / December 2005Dedicated OAB server
I was working on a design for a 35,000 users and the managers are insistant that in a Exchange 2003 sp2 environment of that size a dedicated Offline address book server is justified. I was couroius if any one else had heard that? I have implemented several environments for over 100,000 people and never did this. What I do usually do is change the update interval (schedule) to more than one time a day. For the larger environments that change their directory often I usually do 2-4 times a day. That way the Outlook Client has a better chance of grabbing the most up to date version that reflects the latest OAB. The real bottleneck is with the Outlook 2003 Client updating while in Cached mode. Is there a reason why there is an issue? You may consider increasing the frequency of the updates for the OAB.  SignatureJonathan No Warrenties Implied, Did you do a FULL backup today?????? > I was working on a design for a 35,000 users and the managers are > insistant that in a Exchange 2003 sp2 environment of that size a > dedicated Offline address book server is justified. I was couroius if > any one else had heard that? http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/assistance/HA011402591033.aspx This may provide you with interesting information concerning what can cause performance issues with Cached Mode. Very seldom is an issue on the Server Side, it is usually attributed to Client Side in my experience (i.e. poor PC configuration, slow workstations, slow network performance). With the licensing and server hardware/support costs I wouldn't say its justifyable. SignatureJonathan No Warrenties Implied, Did you do a FULL backup today?????? > I have implemented several environments for over 100,000 people and never did > this. What I do usually do is change the update interval (schedule) to more [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > dedicated Offline address book server is justified. I was couroius if > > any one else had heard that? I thought it was a little over the top. I was just looking for a reality check to see if I was missing something simple. > I have implemented several environments for over 100,000 people and never did > this. What I do usually do is change the update interval (schedule) to more [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Is there a reason why there is an issue? You may consider increasing the > frequency of the updates for the OAB. I wonder where they got that one from, there is a way to change the update interval in outlook, I can't find the article. You could use it as a Front-End server also, nothing wrong with having another one of those:) SignatureJonathan No Warrenties Implied, Did you do a FULL backup today?????? > I thought it was a little over the top. I was just looking for a > reality check to see if I was missing something simple. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Is there a reason why there is an issue? You may consider increasing the > > frequency of the updates for the OAB. Or another DC/GC. That would help more than a dedicated OAB server. SignatureJonathan No Warrenties Implied, Did you do a FULL backup today?????? > I thought it was a little over the top. I was just looking for a > reality check to see if I was missing something simple. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Is there a reason why there is an issue? You may consider increasing the > > frequency of the updates for the OAB. Were planning 1 DC\GC for every 4 back end/ PF servers. That is covered. Jeff > Or another DC/GC. That would help more than a dedicated OAB server. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.