From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 22 10:09:18 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B16C416A4CE for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 10:09:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB92E43D1F for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 10:09:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) j2MA9Pb31669; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 02:09:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Danny" Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 02:09:14 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 Importance: Normal cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 10:09:18 -0000 owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org wrote: > On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 01:52:40 -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt > wrote: >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >>> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Anthony >>> Atkielski Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 11:29 PM >>> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >>> Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD? >>> >> >>> If the database becomes corrupted, which is highly unlikely, you >>> must restore it from your last backup (every mail administrator >>> takes frequent backups, which can be done online with Exchange). >> >> Only if you purchase a backup software. > > You are totally 100% wrong. NTBackup is included with Windows, and > is fully supported by Microsoft. > >> If you want to use windows backup you must shut down exchange >> because windows backup will not back up open files. > > Wrong. Have you bothered to read Microsoft's Exchange Backup & > Restore Guide? > I think they renamed it the Exchange Disaster Recovery Operations guide. You are correct only for for 2003 server+Exchange 2003. Not for Exchange 2000 or Exchange 5.5 on Windows 2K or NT4. And I will bet that this won't work if you try loading the next version of Exchange on 2003 server, or try loading Exchange 2003 on the next version of Windows server. The Exchange backup functionality is not in the Windows backup utility supplied with Server 2000 or NT4 except if you go through a clumsy process of first using the backup utility to backup exchange to disk, then backup again the resultant disk file to tape. Most people using windows backup in those environments don't do this, instead they shut down all the exchange server processes, run the backup, then start them all up again. That is fine for a small company. Not so fine for large enterprises. And the other problem is that not a single previous verison of Windows Backup or ntbackup or whatever you want to call it, is compatible with any other version. Now maybe Microsoft has decided to put an end to this rubbish and in 2003 server they decided to actually go ahead and settle on a tape format, so that our backups will actually be usable for more than a few years. But until they have proven they have done this - by not screwing with the format for a few revisions of Windows - a commercial backup software is still the only usable backup software for the large enterprise. Despite the studies like the one done by Radicati Group, http://www.geekzone.co.nz/content.asp?contentid=4145 that claim Exchange 2003 has overtaken the prior versions of Exchange, I am still seeing a vast majority of Exchange 5.5 and 2000 servers among customers of the ISP I work at. I therefore have to conclude that only the large corporations with site licenses have gone ahead with Exchange 2003 upgrades, and that the smaller companies who can't afford yearly service contracts are sticking with their working servers. (because our customer base is skewed to the smaller companies, as is most ISP's) As a result the studies are skewed. > the Exchange > backup agents are a couple of hundred dollars. Pretty cheap when you > consider the value of corporate email these days Then why is Exchange a minority (only 33%) of the market for corporate e-mail? (according to the study URL cited above?) Ted