Best be honest Peter why don't you use your usual email address. ;-)
FYI, Peter can be contacted at work on bodifee_peter@emc.com (if I'm not mistaken).
Cheers, your old friend from a previous life, CAW
Charlie Whitfield Network Appliance UK
email: caw@netapp.com voice: +44 20 8756 6762 mobile: +44 7718 160954
-----Original Message----- From: Peter Bodifee [mailto:bodif36772@yahoo.com] Sent: 08 November 2000 14:50 To: 'Bercovici, Val'; supak.lailert@yipintsoi.com Cc: toasters@mathworks.com; 'Martin Hannigan'; rdobbins@netmore.net Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long)
Dear Val,
Please be honest and open to the user community and add " and has no plans to do so in the future" to the second sentence.
See http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q250/3/48.asp
Peter
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Bercovici, Val Sent: dinsdag 7 november 2000 21:14 To: 'supak.lailert@yipintsoi.com' Cc: toasters@mathworks.com; Martin Hannigan; rdobbins@netmore.net Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long)
Hi Supak et al,
Please let me clarify your support statement below. Microsoft does not currently support NAS for Exchange Server 5.5 or 2000. Network Appliance fully supports Exchange 5.5 on filers via our SnapManager 1.x for Exchange software. We have engaged IBM Global Services' highly-regarded Enterprise Services for Microsoft Technologies Practice for our escalation path regarding Exchange-specific issues that we cannot resolve.
[ ... marketing stuff removed for clarity ...]
Thanks, -Val. Manager, Collaborative Strategy Network Appliance Inc. WHO STORES MORE THAN HALF THE WORLD'S E-MAILBOXES? FIND OUT AT: www.netapp.com 613.724.8674 - Phone 847.589.6510 - Fax 800.489.6924 - Pager E-Mail: valb@netapp.com
-----Original Message----- From: Supak backup e-mail account [mailto:supaklailert@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 10:31 PM To: Martin Hannigan; rdobbins@netmore.net Cc: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: Exchange 2k
NetApp filer is fully supported for use with MS Exchange. I don't see how this could lead to a problem more than any direct-attaced storage.
NetApp choking on lots of small files? I don't think so. WAFL handles small files far better than most file systems notably UFS.
Waste of space? Maybe. NetApp uses 4K blocks so if you have lots of really small files <4K then you'll waste quite a bit of space.
Supak
--- Martin Hannigan hannigan@world.std.com wrote:
For both performance and supportability reasons,
it is extremely inadvisable
to put Exchange mailboxes/private stores/public
stores on anything other
than a filesystem which is directly-connected to
the NT server in question.
People do all sorts of odd things with NetApps
just because they can - and
don't get me wrong, I love my F740 - but this is
just plain crazy. For your
own peace of mind, don't do it.
So the netapp still chokes on lots of active small files i.e. like usenet news, etc? We were thinking about turning ours into a hardcore news spool..but I remember a few years ago there was some issue with the millions of < 64KB file sizes..
-M
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
-
Whitfield, Charlie