Help!

Using cached exchange mode vs not using cached exchange mode

 
Post new topic   General Reply to Topic (not reply to a specific post)    Forums Home -> Installation RSS
Next:  Help, I created a mail message format and I can't..  
Author Message
Jim in Cleveland
External


Since: Jul 05, 2006
Posts: 6



PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 10:36 am    Post subject: Using cached exchange mode vs not using cached exchange mode
Archived from groups: microsoft>public>outlook>installation (more info?)

We are using Outlook 2003 and Exchange 2000 server. Getting prompts about
using cached exchange mode. What is the default setting for this? Use or do
not use? What the benefits/drawbacks of using cached exchange mode. We are
in a 2003 domain environment.
Back to top
neo [mvp outlook]
External


Since: Jan 17, 2005
Posts: 785



PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 10:03 am    Post subject: Re: Using cached exchange mode vs not using cached exchange mode [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Default is on for mailbox and off for public folder favorites.

I recommend use because it does isolate the customer from intermittent
connectivity issues from the Exchange & GC servers. Since the user is
primary working out of the offline address book and OST, it means less round
trips to the server when looking at the same message lots of times. Less
round tripping to the server means that one should be able to have a higher
user per server count.

The biggest drawback I hear about at work is that it can take up to 24 hours
before the end user sees a change to the global address list. This is
because the default behavior of Outlook 2003 is to update the OAB once a
day.

Oh and before I forget, cached mode is required in order for the junk email
feature to work in Outlook. When its off, its whatever it is at the server.

"Jim in Cleveland" wrote in
message
> We are using Outlook 2003 and Exchange 2000 server. Getting prompts about
> using cached exchange mode. What is the default setting for this? Use or
> do
> not use? What the benefits/drawbacks of using cached exchange mode. We
> are
> in a 2003 domain environment.
Back to top
Deme
External


Since: Sep 22, 2006
Posts: 1



PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:01 am    Post subject: Re: Using cached exchange mode vs not using cached exchange mode [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

I have to disagree with you.
True using cahced mode does prevent the increased round trips to the
server but speaking directly from experience and working in both arenas
I have found that using Exchange under normal mode doesn't produce that
much more traffic. Also if every DC in the Org is also a GC and running
DNS then you really will have limited issues with updates to the GAL
and server traffic. If you are running a clustered or even an non
clustered environment as long as the DC's are also GC's and DNS servers
You should be fine.Also remember that Microsoft does NOT support
Exchange nor outlook if you are running in Cached mode.
neo [mvp outlook] wrote:
> Default is on for mailbox and off for public folder favorites.
>
> I recommend use because it does isolate the customer from intermittent
> connectivity issues from the Exchange & GC servers. Since the user is
> primary working out of the offline address book and OST, it means less round
> trips to the server when looking at the same message lots of times. Less
> round tripping to the server means that one should be able to have a higher
> user per server count.
>
> The biggest drawback I hear about at work is that it can take up to 24 hours
> before the end user sees a change to the global address list. This is
> because the default behavior of Outlook 2003 is to update the OAB once a
> day.
>
> Oh and before I forget, cached mode is required in order for the junk email
> feature to work in Outlook. When its off, its whatever it is at the server.
>
> "Jim in Cleveland" wrote in
> message
> > We are using Outlook 2003 and Exchange 2000 server. Getting prompts about
> > using cached exchange mode. What is the default setting for this? Use or
> > do
> > not use? What the benefits/drawbacks of using cached exchange mode. We
> > are
> > in a 2003 domain environment.
Back to top
Milly Staples [MVP - Outl
External


Since: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 7116



PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 10:47 pm    Post subject: Re: Using cached exchange mode vs not using cached exchange mode [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

"Also remember that Microsoft does NOT support Exchange nor outlook if you are running in Cached mode."

Care to cite where Microsoft will not support this configuration? A Technet or MSDN article citation will do. Even a white paper...


--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, Deme asked:

| I have to disagree with you.
| True using cahced mode does prevent the increased round trips to the
| server but speaking directly from experience and working in both
| arenas I have found that using Exchange under normal mode doesn't
| produce that much more traffic. Also if every DC in the Org is also a
| GC and running DNS then you really will have limited issues with
| updates to the GAL and server traffic. If you are running a clustered
| or even an non clustered environment as long as the DC's are also
| GC's and DNS servers You should be fine.Also remember that Microsoft
| does NOT support Exchange nor outlook if you are running in Cached
| mode.
| neo [mvp outlook] wrote:
|| Default is on for mailbox and off for public folder favorites.
||
|| I recommend use because it does isolate the customer from
|| intermittent connectivity issues from the Exchange & GC servers.
|| Since the user is primary working out of the offline address book
|| and OST, it means less round trips to the server when looking at the
|| same message lots of times. Less round tripping to the server means
|| that one should be able to have a higher user per server count.
||
|| The biggest drawback I hear about at work is that it can take up to
|| 24 hours before the end user sees a change to the global address
|| list. This is because the default behavior of Outlook 2003 is to
|| update the OAB once a day.
||
|| Oh and before I forget, cached mode is required in order for the
|| junk email feature to work in Outlook. When its off, its whatever
|| it is at the server.
||
|| "Jim in Cleveland" wrote
|| in message
||| We are using Outlook 2003 and Exchange 2000 server. Getting
||| prompts about using cached exchange mode. What is the default
||| setting for this? Use or do
||| not use? What the benefits/drawbacks of using cached exchange
||| mode. We are
||| in a 2003 domain environment.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   General Reply to Topic (not reply to a specific post)    Forums Home -> Installation All times are: Eastern Time (US & Canada)
Page 1 of 1

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum