Limitting the Number of PST Files??
Good Morning. In our exchange 2003 SP2 Environment, we have set the max mailbox size for users to 150MB. The problem we are having is that many users have 4-10 DIFFERENT PST files, averaging 1.8g - totalling 150g. PST files account for 1/2 of the data on our file Server. How does your company limit the amount of PST FIles a user can have? Many of these PST Files are CYA and archiving. Thanks for your suggestions!
All Replies
- Probably the below article wll answer your Query
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/832925
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/830336
Vinod |CCNA|MCSE 2003 +Messaging|MCTS|ITIL V3| - thank you for the links, I will review. In addition, how much data are companys allowing their users to retain? IE, Mailbox Size? # of PSTs? Size of PSTs?
Hi Rob,
There is no way to limit a user to create a pst file. pst file is not associate with a user, everyone can achieve and open it. Even if you can limit its number, they can forward the emails to another account and achieve them. You can limit the pst file size, but you can’t control the number of pst file they can create. Second, we don't recommand you put the pst file in the file server.
Personal folder files are unsupported over a LAN or over a WAN linkhttp://support.microsoft.com/kb/297019
Thanks,Elvis
- thank you for your reply. What are other company's doing? Do they have a larger mailbox size? Do they outlaw the use of PST files? or do they let the users create as many as they want?
- We have 1 gig user mailboxes and we've seen PST files as large as 20 gigs. Most PST file are stored locally on the machine's but backing them up over the wire is a real (fill in your own thoughts). I think the most pst files related to one user that i saw was 8 or 9 and each of them was about 3 gigs spread out across the network and local machine.
We are currently looking at moving away from pst files altogether and forcing users to delete unneeded read receipts and sent items. If something needs to be saved they will have to save the email specifically.


