EDIT 8/10/2010: Please note that this blog post covers namely the history of named properties in Exchange. For updated and current guidance of how to deal with named properties issues, please see t...
Updated Jul 01, 2019
Version 2.0
Blog Post
Thanks xC0000005
I'm only asking to try and understand the impact of this issue.
I followed your advise and entered the words "named", "property" and "quota" in the search engine of my choice. I limited my results to articles on the Microsoft site, as the others tended to just repeat that source.
The first few results linked to http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851492.aspx which is titled "Understanding the Impact of Named Property and Replica Identifier Limits on Exchange Databases". Sounds great! Unfortunately it didn't explain the impact at all on mailbox databases. It just listed the same warning I've found everywhere. Namely "If this happens on a mailbox database, you must create a new mailbox database". ... um why?
back to the searching
I decided to search for kb 820379. Found it only in an article 898785. Near the end it provides a link to 820379 however the link is broken and the Microsoft Help and Support page reports "Sorry, but we couldn't find the page that you requested."
I kept searching and found http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851495.aspx which is titled "Events 9666, 9667, 9668, and 9669 Received When Named Properties or Replica Identifiers Are Depleted for An Exchange Database". An old friend ...
However it did have one line of relevance to my question above. This is the sort of info I'm after: "... Outlook ... may receive the error code 0x80040900 ... when the user attempts to send a new message or save a new message in the user's Drafts folder." Now that is serious.
As we have already hit the set limit (but not the hard limit) on multiple of our databases we could increase the quota and have it quickly consumed by rubbish x-headers, however we have seen no impact. Especially no errors when sending an email or saving drafts.
As the topic was very important to us I thought I would ask for more info. More along the lines of "What could actually go wrong?".
Sorry to have caused enough problems for you to use sarcasm.
I'm only asking to try and understand the impact of this issue.
I followed your advise and entered the words "named", "property" and "quota" in the search engine of my choice. I limited my results to articles on the Microsoft site, as the others tended to just repeat that source.
The first few results linked to http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851492.aspx which is titled "Understanding the Impact of Named Property and Replica Identifier Limits on Exchange Databases". Sounds great! Unfortunately it didn't explain the impact at all on mailbox databases. It just listed the same warning I've found everywhere. Namely "If this happens on a mailbox database, you must create a new mailbox database". ... um why?
back to the searching
I decided to search for kb 820379. Found it only in an article 898785. Near the end it provides a link to 820379 however the link is broken and the Microsoft Help and Support page reports "Sorry, but we couldn't find the page that you requested."
I kept searching and found http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851495.aspx which is titled "Events 9666, 9667, 9668, and 9669 Received When Named Properties or Replica Identifiers Are Depleted for An Exchange Database". An old friend ...
However it did have one line of relevance to my question above. This is the sort of info I'm after: "... Outlook ... may receive the error code 0x80040900 ... when the user attempts to send a new message or save a new message in the user's Drafts folder." Now that is serious.
As we have already hit the set limit (but not the hard limit) on multiple of our databases we could increase the quota and have it quickly consumed by rubbish x-headers, however we have seen no impact. Especially no errors when sending an email or saving drafts.
As the topic was very important to us I thought I would ask for more info. More along the lines of "What could actually go wrong?".
Sorry to have caused enough problems for you to use sarcasm.