Journaling vs. SMTP to a 3rd Party for Compliance (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Microsoft Exchange 2007] >> Compliance


NW2468 -> Journaling vs. SMTP to a 3rd Party for Compliance (22.Oct.2008 11:37:13 AM)

We are looking into duplicating our mail store (small DB, 20 users) using Journaling or a 3rd party.  I recently realized we won't be able to use a single server (we have EX2007 Standard) in order do this, since the Journal account can never be in the same store it is journaling.

Our options seem to be:

1) Upgrade ot Exchange Enterprise and create a second store on the same machine for the journal.
2) Buy a second Standard Exchange server to host the journal account

I've also seen a few people using a 3rd party via an SMTP connector for compliance.  Can anyone point me in the direction of companies that do this?  Would we be able to do this with the exsiting Standard Exchange license or will it still require us to journal first before sending off to the 3rd party company.

I'm hoping that we can just set up a rule to send all incoming/outgoing mail through the SMTP connector to the 3rd party company for journaling - is this the way it'd work??

Thanks for any help!

John Weber -> RE: Journaling vs. SMTP to a 3rd Party for Compliance (22.Oct.2008 11:48:07 AM)

Seems that Standard E2k7 does five SG.

or simply stand up a *nix box with sendmail, and journal to that.


3rd party tools can be expensive for small companies.

If it was me, I would buy a USB drive, and put LCR in place.

NW2468 -> RE: Journaling vs. SMTP to a 3rd Party for Compliance (22.Oct.2008 11:55:14 AM)

Hmmm...I wonder if it was 2003 then that only allowed one storage group? 

We'd like to be able to open up the journal in Outlook from another machine, which I'm not sure we'd be able to do with LCR.  Our plan was to run full backups through Exchange (or maybe use ExMerge) and then backup the Journal account in case we need to "quickly" restore old, lost, deleted mail.

So we should definitely be able to run the journal on a separate store on the same server, right?  I know processing power can become a concern, but since we're only running 20 mailboxes, I don't think it should be too bad.

Elan Shudnow -> RE: Journaling vs. SMTP to a 3rd Party for Compliance (22.Oct.2008 12:22:57 PM)

Exchange 2003 Standard was 1 Storage Group consisting of 1 mailbox store and 1 public folder store.  Exchange 2003 Enterprise had 4 Storage Groups which up to 5 Mailbox Stores in each allowing you to have up to 20 databases total.

Exchange 2007 Standard is 5 Databases and 5 Storage Groups with a default database limit of 50GB (can be increased via registry) and 50 Databases and 50 Storage Groups with a default limit of 16TB.

You "can" journal to a separate mailbox server, just keep in mind you won't be utilizing Single Instance Storage (SIS) when doing so.  Keeping the journalled mailbox on the same store will essentially take up no extra space due to SIS.

Also, LCR just maintains a copy of the database.  Your clients will always connect to the live store.  Journalled information will be copied to the LCR copy just as any other mailbox.  If something happens to your live store, you'd just start using your LCR copy and you should be able to access your journalled data just as you previously did.

NW2468 -> RE: Journaling vs. SMTP to a 3rd Party for Compliance (22.Oct.2008 12:26:15 PM)

everywhere I'm reading says that you should NOT keep the journal account on the same store as your mailboxes because it can create an infinite loop or mess with the transaction logs, slow processing, etc.

All apps, message boards, etc. have been saying you shouldalways keep the journal account ona  second server - or at worst a second store.

Is this not the case?

Elan Shudnow -> RE: Journaling vs. SMTP to a 3rd Party for Compliance (22.Oct.2008 12:32:15 PM)

Not sure on that one to be honest.  Any time I've journalled we've used a dedicated server.  I'd be curious about that though.  Can you provide any links?

NW2468 -> RE: Journaling vs. SMTP to a 3rd Party for Compliance (22.Oct.2008 12:54:35 PM)

From Postini (
"When setting up a journaling mailbox, you must place it in a mailbox database for which you do not plan to turn on journaling"

From Microsoft:

"If you want to journal mailboxes that reside on an Exchange 2003 mailbox database, the journaling mailbox must be located in an Exchange 2003 mailbox database that does not have journaling enabled. Configuring a mailbox database to journal messages to a mailbox that is located on a non–Exchange 2003 mailbox database is not supported. If you locate a journaling mailbox in an Exchange 2003 mailbox database that is being journaled, excessive disk utilization can occur."

So I guess I can run a single store with two databases, one with the mailboxes and one with the journal account, does that look right?

I swear I saw a bunch of articles/posts that said you should always keep the journal account on a dedicated server, but I can't seem to locate anything now to show you...figures.

I'll keep looking.

NW2468 -> RE: Journaling vs. SMTP to a 3rd Party for Compliance (22.Oct.2008 12:59:07 PM)

Here's a post on the looping issue:

Not much info, just someone with the problem.

Page: [1]