Video Screencast Help
Symantec to Separate Into Two Focused, Industry-Leading Technology Companies. Learn more.
Archiving and eDiscovery Community Blog
Showing posts in English
Rob.Wilcox | 05 Jul 2011 | 29 comments

 

A question arose the other day, which is worthwhile covering here.  The question is :

 

When using Outlook 2007 or Outlook 2010 Instant Search, with Virtual Vault enabled, what is meant to be searched?

 

To answer this you need to consider what you are truly looking at within Outlook when you have Virtual Vault enabled.  Virtual Vault for all intents and purposes is the MDC file, one file.. with “stub” information in it of all the items in your archive.  Even if you have no vault cache content stored locally, or if you have size limitations, or date limitations, the MDC, the metadata, is always the complete set.  It contains things like dates, times, subject, recipients, and most importantly the first 120 characters of the message.

 

When you search with Outlook Instant you have the following options (From Outlook 2010) :

All mail items

All Outlook Items...

Rob.Wilcox | 05 Jul 2011 | 0 comments

 

There is almost always something that I forget to do when I set up a new Enterprise Vault server.  You would think I would have a nice checklist to follow, but I don’t.  I never got around to creating one .. yet.  I was struck down by this again the other day.  I setup a new server, all was working well, and after testing archiving and retrieving of a few items I loaded up the mailbox with 10,000 items, and archived them all.

Next I enabled Vault Cache, but I just could NOT get the thing to synchronise any content at all

In the end, after much troubleshooting I discovered the cause.  I had not set a cache location on the server properties :

Useful to know..  difficult to track down !  This is what the client sees :

 

The Header / MDC...

Rob.Wilcox | 05 Jul 2011 | 0 comments

 

Another interesting bit of SQL jiggery pokery that I found the other day was the method to move Vault Store Partition data from one location to another on the same Enterprise Vault server.  This would be useful, if for example, you had started to run out of space on a LUN, and had a “bigger” LUN to put all the partition data on.

The following is the article that I found which describes the procedure :

http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=content&id=TECH35742

Rob.Wilcox | 05 Jul 2011 | 0 comments

 

A question which came up today on the Symantec Connect Forums is whether Vault Cache/Virtual Vault data is secure.  The answer is that by default it’s not.  If a machine containing Vault Cache data were to be used by someone else, then the files which make up Vault Cache/Virtual can be opened by a regular Outlook client.  They’re not particularly “nice” to navigate, but just like Outlook PST files they are not encrypted.  The files we are talking about :-

*.mdc

This is the metadata cache file.  There will be one per archive that the end user is synching.

Example file name : 1808AE8F4BB654DA189DCAA17C183C051110000GPKENTVLT1.enterprise.com.mdc

*.db

Even if there is only MDC file there will usually be more than one .DB file.  These form the Content Cache.

Example file name : 2007_01_03_0041.db

By default these file reside in the user...

Rob.Wilcox | 03 Jul 2011 | 0 comments

 

I happened to find this article the other day by accident, but it made me stop and think.  There have been a few discussions over the last year about SQL, and the Fingerprint database in particular.  So, I thought it would be worth sharing this article on how you need to update the Enterprise Vault Directory Database if you move a Fingerprint database (perhaps to faster/different hardware?).  Here is the article :

http://www.symantec.com/business/support//index?page=content&id=TECH64655

Gonz | 30 Jun 2011 | 0 comments

By default Enterprise Vault does not process the hidden mailboxes.

In order to make Enterprise Vault to process those hideen mailboxes, a registry key was introduced:

HKLM\Software\KVS\Enterprise Vault\Agents
ProcessHiddenMailboxes 1

Bear in mind that the hidden messages do not appear in the Enterprise Vault console, so when you click on the enable or disable buttons, the hidden mailboxes will not appear.

There is a temporal "trick" however to show those mailboxes.

We can execute the following query:

Use EnterpriseVaultDirectory
update ExchangeMailboxEntry
Set MbxExchangeState=’0′ where MbxExchangeState=’2′

After executing the query, restart the Enterprise Vault console and retry to enable / disable the hidden mailboxes that now should be visible.

Bear in mind that after a new execution of the provisioning task, the mailboxes will be hidden again, because the...

Gonz | 30 Jun 2011 | 0 comments

1. It is required to create an archiving task for each of the servers of the DAG?

Yes. If one of the servers belonging to a DAG group (let´s call it Server1) becomes unavailable, all the active databases of that server will be moved to another server of the DAG (let´s supose it is called Server2)

If Enterprise Vault was archiving the database when it was active in Server1, in order to continue with the archiving when the database becomes active in Server2, an archiving task needs to be created and up and running for Server2.

This is extensible to all the servers of a DAG, so we need to have an archiving task for each of the Exchange Servers belonging to the DAG.

2.- It is required to create a System Mailbox for each of the members of the DAG?

No, only one it is required. However must be created in one active database in the DAG so it replicates across servers belonging to the DAG.

Preguntas bá...

Rob.Wilcox | 29 Jun 2011 | 0 comments

 

As many people will have spotted Microsoft released Office 2010 Service Pack 1 yesterday.  If you also remember Enterprise Vault 9.0.1 offered an Enterprise Vault Outlook Addin that supports Outlook 2010.

As with most certifications involving service packs, our certification teams aims to “add” support for the service pack within 60-90 days of release, provided no major roadblocks are found.   By that I mean that if “big” bugs are discovered then these will obviously need addressing before any certification completes, and that might push the cycle out beyond the 60-90 day timeframe.

That being said, I just downloaded both flavours of the service pack :

32 bit : http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?displaylang=...

Rob.Wilcox | 29 Jun 2011 | 0 comments

 

Everyone in the Enterprise Vault world knows how powerful (and sometimes complicated) Enterprise Vault Policy Manager (EVPM) can be.  One of the questions that gets asked frequently, and can be answered using EVPM is :

How do I exclude a particular folder from Archiving in everyone’s mailbox?

The answer is you can set Do Not Archive on that folder across every mailbox, using EVPM.  Here is how to do it:

You need a .ini file saved with Unicode formatting which looks something like this :

[Directory]

DirectoryComputerName= evault1.ev.local

SiteName = ev01

[Mailbox]

distinguishedname = /o=EV Training/ou=First Administrative Group/cn=Recipients/cn=mrg

[Folder]

Name=\Junk E-Mail

FilterName=DoNotArchive

OverrideArchiveLocks=True

Then you run EVPM with that.

You will notice :

* Background, run now, scheduled archiving will all now...

Rob.Wilcox | 28 Jun 2011 | 3 comments

 

Storage Expiry Reports has been talked about a few times in the forums, both internally and externally.  As you may know there is a button which can be enabled in the Enterprise Vault Outlook Addin to give an end user the ability to see which items are going to be expired in the coming days.

This is great, well at least it’s a great start!

It doesn’t proactively tell users, I’ve heard people thinking about/discussing an idea of having the report auto emailed to users once per week, or changing the icon of shortcut’s (but then what if you don’t have shortcuts any more, or they’re buried somewhere down your folder structure in a folder called IMPORTANT)?

It doesn’t give an administrator an overview of all the expiry that it is about to take place.

Here are two ideas which have been logged on the Connect Forums – I’d suggest voting on them, if you want to try to see some changes...