Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

How defrag exchange Db on second partition

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Pupo

unread,
Feb 5, 2007, 5:58:02 AM2/5/07
to
Hi
My exchange Db was growing to much, i read document to make offline defrag
but i don't understand how to do it on another partiton because i haven't
110% free space on C:\
Can help me?
Tia Pupo


Gary M

unread,
Feb 5, 2007, 11:53:44 AM2/5/07
to
Here is what someone gave me a couple of years ago to do an offline defrag
to another PC or server when you dont have the space available on your 2000
exchange server.

I have had to use it several times. workes pretty good.

Here is the text:


You do not have to copy the files before you defrag the system. I would

recommend the following actions on the Exchange server to defrag your

database.

1) Stop the Information store service

2) Map a network drive to a location that has at least 18Gb of Free space

3) Run the following command "eseutil /d F:\mdbdata\priv1.edb /t
g:\tempdfg.edb"

eseutil /d F:\exchsrvr\mdbdata\priv1.edb /t g:\tempdfg.edb

(fill in the correct drive letters and paths for your

environment)

4) Once it finishes save all of your e00*.log files to a safe location

5) Mark the database as "can be overwritten by a restore"

6) Start the Information store service

What this command does it run the defrag "eseutil /d" specified the edb file

to defragment "f:\mdbdata\priv1.edb" then specifies the located to place the

temporary database "/t X:\tempdfg.edb". As the command runs it will create

the defragged database for you on the remote network share. It will then

copy the database back to the production location. It is simply a matter of

executing the command then waiting for it to complete.


"Pupo" <uncles...@libero.it> wrote in message
news:uTjdtSRS...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Nick Gillott [MVP]

unread,
Feb 5, 2007, 2:58:53 PM2/5/07
to
I'd skip point 5 unless someone can tell me a good reason why you allow your
Exchange database to be overwritten. Good way to make a horlicks of your
store.

"Gary M" <garym_jacksonfurniture(removespam)@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OmiVQXUS...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]

unread,
Feb 5, 2007, 8:47:35 PM2/5/07
to
In news:uTjdtSRS...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl,
Pupo <uncles...@libero.it> typed:

You can use the /t switch to direct the temp file output elsewhere. Note
that it will take longer to run the offline defrag if you use this.

Are you sure you need to do this anyway? eseutil is not meant to be run as
part of regular maintenance. Exchange will re-use the whitespace in the
database file. Check in your app event log for 1221 events, which should
tell you how much space you'd actually recover. If you run E2k standard,
make sure you've got mailbox quotas in place (defaults set on the store,
exceptions made per mailbox) which will prevent it growing beyond 16GB.


Gary M

unread,
Feb 6, 2007, 8:14:10 AM2/6/07
to
so you shouldnt do #5?
I got this from a microsoft guy in this newsgroup several years ago.

I have used it twice now, without any issues, but maybe I was just lucky?

Gary

"Nick Gillott [MVP]" <ni...@gillott.co.uk> wrote in message
news:uXaBHAWS...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

Mark Arnold [MVP]

unread,
Feb 6, 2007, 7:49:35 AM2/6/07
to
Mapping a network drive isn't actually a supported solution and you'll
find plenty of Microsoft people who will do major rolling of the
rosaries if you even suggest it. Still, if the network is reliable and
in good shape you are very unlikely to have a problem. It's a devils
advocate type comment really.

The whole copying of log files out is wrong and pointless anyway. You
should do a backup before attempting a defrag and one after. If you
cannot do a backup you shouldn't attempt to do a defrag.
If you can do a backup you won't have any log files that have any
(much) data in it since the store will be dismounted as soon as you've
done the backup so the only stuff in log files you have will be mail
received/sent during the timeframe of the backup.

So, I'm on message with 1 through 3, not 4 and 5 because they're
uncessary.

Gary M

unread,
Feb 6, 2007, 10:50:53 AM2/6/07
to
good to know.

thanks!

gary


"Mark Arnold [MVP]" <ma...@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:g0ugs25a2p3r9n2fs...@4ax.com...

0 new messages