[itdiscuss] Exhange Defrag

Tue May 26 17:06:24 EDT 2009

I found this insightful, "Exchange databases run a defragmentation
process once a day by default..." The rest of the article, How can I
defragment Exchange 2000/2003 Server databases? can be found at:

http://www.petri.co.il/defragment_exchange_2000_2003_server_databases.ht
m

The article goes on to describe the process of ESEUTIL offline
defragmentation. It seems to me that one would want to follow this
procedure with a disk defrag while the store is still offline after the
database defrag.

Bobby Stewart

Network Analyst

Brentwood Baptist Church

Brentwood, TN

(615) 324-6149 office

(615) 830-0012 cell

From: discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org
[mailto:discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Brunson
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 2:03 PM
To: 'IT Discussion Forum'
Subject: Re: [itdiscuss] Exhange Defrag

I agree that running a disk defrag on a running Exchange store is not
the best idea.  However, I think I need to clarify something.  Disk
defrag and eseutil are serving two different purposes.  Eseutil moves
data around inside the database file to make sure it is all contiguous
IN the file, and disk defrag makes sure that the sectors containing the
files are all contiguous ON the disk.  As an Exchange database file
grows, it can get spread all over the disk just like any other file.
Running eseutil for a database on a fairly full disk actually has the
potential to make the database files significantly more fragmented, even
if the data inside those files is made more contiguous.  Windows has to
find a place to put those files when it makes them or expands them, and
that may mean filling gaps on the hard drive.  If the drive is dedicated
to Exchange databases you are less likely to find fragmented DBs, since
the only thing on there will be DBs, but it is still possible.    

A disk defrag will almost certainly not be able to defrag the Exchange
DB files while the DB is mounted, and if it could that could result in a
damaged DB.  So if you want to run a disk defrag, I would suggest you
dismount the DB or stop the services.  

Kevin Brunson

From: discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org
[mailto:discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org] On Behalf Of Jason Hand
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 1:14 PM
To: 'IT Discussion Forum'
Subject: Re: [itdiscuss] Exhange Defrag

I would not try a defrag on a volume with the exchange store on it while
in production.  The store is just a couple of large database files and
are not defragmentable except for what you mentioned, eseutil.  As for
the other files, surely they are not causing performance problems for
Exchange.

JKDefrag works well and I have used it on file servers and workstations
with success.  Since it runs as a command-line utility it works very
well and is easy to schedule via the Task Scheduler.

Defragmenting can help in situations where the drive is being used to do
lots of read/write access to the files stored on it like a File server
but since Exchange is like any other database system it houses it's
files in 'containers' and therefore doesn't really benefit from the rest
of the drive being defragmented.

-Jason

________________________________

From: discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org
[mailto:discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org] On Behalf Of Stephen W. Klose
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 1:57 PM
To: discuss at itdiscuss.org
Subject: [itdiscuss] Exhange Defrag

Are there any issues with running a file level defrag on drive that also
has the Exchange Server Stor?

I know there is eseutil, but at the same time, there are other files on
the drive that are fragmented and affecting performance.

Here are some links that indicate it is okay, but I have seen warnings
on the subject as well:

Microsoft Help Article: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/328804

Article with user comments:
http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2004/10/25/247342.aspx

Also: Does anyone know of any issues with jkdefrag? (open source
alternative to the windows defrag)

Thanks,

Steve Klose

Altadena Valley Presbyterian Church

Cell: 205.427.5420

Home: 205.987.7545

Pager: pager at klose.cc

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.40/2135 - Release Date:
05/26/09 08:53:00

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://optimus.thompsonic.com/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20090526/d68e56d9/attachment-0001.htm 