EDIT 5/30/2008: The content of this article has since been published in our official Exchange documentation. Please go here for the most updated version.
As part of a broader investigation, we measur...
Updated Jul 01, 2019
Version 2.0
Blog Post
Andrew -- a factor of 3 increase seems unreasonable, but I can't put my hands on data to quantify it.
Derick -- your calculation is correct for one user. Users spread out in different time zone will tend to even out the load, so you wouldn't need as large a 'peak factor' (I used a factor of 2 in the last paragraph -- based on the peak to average ratio of Microsoft's corporate email flow).
Richard -- These were simulating OWA premium users. OWA light is optimized for low bandwidth networks by reducing the round trips (no spell check, for example) and a simpler UI (smaller gifs and less Jscript) -- but the network bytes sent aren't dramatically different from the premium client (which is reasonable, since the same message bodies are moved in both cases).
Derick -- your calculation is correct for one user. Users spread out in different time zone will tend to even out the load, so you wouldn't need as large a 'peak factor' (I used a factor of 2 in the last paragraph -- based on the peak to average ratio of Microsoft's corporate email flow).
Richard -- These were simulating OWA premium users. OWA light is optimized for low bandwidth networks by reducing the round trips (no spell check, for example) and a simpler UI (smaller gifs and less Jscript) -- but the network bytes sent aren't dramatically different from the premium client (which is reasonable, since the same message bodies are moved in both cases).