Introduction
NOTE: For more comprehensive coverage of Exchange 2007 storage as well as final RTM recommendations, please see the following blog post:
http://msexchangeteam.com/a...
Updated Jul 01, 2019
Version 2.0
Blog Post
I had to do a double take on this article...
It seems like MSFT is taking the I/O pattern backwards in time to Exchange 5.5 with the IMS (IMC).
You are now streaming all incoming mail on Transport servers into the EDB which requires a conversion into MAPI format. Sounds pretty much like the IMS to me.
So why the move away from SMTP as the native format - both in use as STM file and in the conversion to MAPI format. 2000&2003 seemed to be more intelligently layed out in the regard that they only converted email to MAPI format when a MAPI client requested it.
And it appears as if the CAS servers (formerly named front-end servers) are no long pass through devices like 2003 was, but are the conversion points back out to Internet formats (IMAP/POP/HTTP).
Can MSFT please explain why they are taking this apparent step backwards in technology? I mean we consultants have been spending years telling people the way 5.5 did conversions and what not was archaic, and that the totally native formats of 200X were superior. It now appears that we are going to have to revisit those same customers when E12 ships and convince them that going in the reverse is now the best way to do things. So if you can help prime us on what MSFT's rationale was, we can start adopting the mentality that much sooner.
Thanks for the EXCELLENT article BTW.
It seems like MSFT is taking the I/O pattern backwards in time to Exchange 5.5 with the IMS (IMC).
You are now streaming all incoming mail on Transport servers into the EDB which requires a conversion into MAPI format. Sounds pretty much like the IMS to me.
So why the move away from SMTP as the native format - both in use as STM file and in the conversion to MAPI format. 2000&2003 seemed to be more intelligently layed out in the regard that they only converted email to MAPI format when a MAPI client requested it.
And it appears as if the CAS servers (formerly named front-end servers) are no long pass through devices like 2003 was, but are the conversion points back out to Internet formats (IMAP/POP/HTTP).
Can MSFT please explain why they are taking this apparent step backwards in technology? I mean we consultants have been spending years telling people the way 5.5 did conversions and what not was archaic, and that the totally native formats of 200X were superior. It now appears that we are going to have to revisit those same customers when E12 ships and convince them that going in the reverse is now the best way to do things. So if you can help prime us on what MSFT's rationale was, we can start adopting the mentality that much sooner.
Thanks for the EXCELLENT article BTW.