Video Screencast Help

Archiving and eDiscovery Community Blog

Showing posts in English
Rob.Wilcox | 30 Aug 2013 | 0 comments
Have you ever wondered why an archive takes a long time to delete?  Sometimes you may be deleting a large archive and it seems to sit in the Vault Admin Console with the 'Marked for deletion' status and the little logo for a long time.  Well, it takes a long time because delete is a lot like archive in that there is a lot of different steps and processes that need to be gone through before the archive can be deleted.
 
Let's take an example.
 
Firstly we need to get the VaultEntryID for the archive we want to delete.  We can that with this bit of SQL:
 
Use EnterpriseVaultDirectory
Select ArchiveName, VaultEntryID, ArchiveStatus
From ArchiveView
Where ArchiveStatus = 4
 
That will show all the archives which are marked for deletion. If you know the archive name, then you could replace the 'Where ArchiveStatus...
Rob.Wilcox | 28 Aug 2013 | 0 comments

There are many, many, many arguments around upgrading Enterprise Vault or not. In fact the same is true of any application or Operating System.  I am a fan of upgrading quite soon after a release of a new version or service pack. There are numerous benefits.

Of course I would always suggest that you do adequate testing in your own lab environment first - and yes, it's hard to get a lab environment which matches your production in environment in terms of scale, and throughput. I wrote an article about why you should have a lab, take a look here. One of the key reasons for upgrading though is all those 'little' fixes that help clean up your Enterprise Vault event logs.  Issues like the one described in this technote:

 
Rob.Wilcox | 25 Aug 2013 | 0 comments

When I'm setting up demo systems I almost always select the archiving option related to archiving 'unread items'.  This is because in a demo or test environment you probably want everything to get archived, and don't have time to send in lots of emails, and then open each mailbox and mark some of them as read and some as unread.  I honestly don't usually think about it too much, doing this step is almost automatic when I set up a test environment.  But what about in production?

Should you archive unread items?

Many people (me included) sometimes read an email, realise that there are some actions needed on it which can't be done right now, and then mark the email as unread - so it stands out. Typically you'd then come back and process these later. If in Enterprise Vault you don't archive unread items, this means that that item, no matter how big or small won't get archived. This has it's good points, and bad...

Rob.Wilcox | 19 Aug 2013 | 0 comments

Everything Enterprise Vault client related used to be what I was 'all about' when I was working in Symantec Enterprise Vault Engineering. Okay I also dabbled with tons of other stuff, but I was somewhat of a subject matter expert when it came to things relating to the Outlook Add-in. That's partly why it irks me when I see things like this technote suggesting to perform the Outlook Add-in install by first of all disabling UAC. I mean a security firm should really recommend this, I don't think.  Anyway, it is an interesting one, and it brings up the question that is often asked about why there is a setup.exe and an MSI file - it's all down to what 'regular' users can launch.

Take a look at the technote: http://www.symantec.com/docs/TECH209344

Would you disable UAC? 

Rob.Wilcox | 18 Aug 2013 | 3 comments

A while ago I wrote about some of the Enterprise Vault process diagrams which have been made available, that post is here.

Now there is a nice technote which lists lots, and lots, and lots of different process diagrams – take a look at:

http://www.symantec.com/docs/HOWTO77305

Rob.Wilcox | 16 Aug 2013 | 0 comments
I have never really been a big fan of mount points, they, I think, can sometimes lead to confusion as to what you are *really* seeing when you view a file / folder structure.  Some people love them though!  One of the things that it can help solve, of course, is running out of drive letters when you have lots of locally attached (or at least locally presented) drives. If you couple that with the idea of having a different drive letter / location of each Enterprise Vault partition then *sometimes* I guess I can see a use for mount points.
 
Essentially you have a 'collection' of mount points, one per vault store partition. It keeps them nicely in 'one place', even though in reality they are on different drives on your system. It can also help with things like Antivirus exclusions as you've now only one place to exclude rather than lots of individual drives.
 
The best way that I found to create...
Rob.Wilcox | 13 Aug 2013 | 0 comments
When you do PST Migration with Enterprise Vault or any of the third party products out there, one question that I always ask is:
 
Where do you want the data to end up?
 
What I mean by this is:
 
- do you want shortcuts in the mailbox or not? 
- If you do want shortcuts do you want the shortcuts in a particular subfolder (and then subfolders underneath that) eg 'PST Migrations'?
- Do you want the shortcuts merged into a structure, or separate folders per PST file? 
 
This of course is a bit of a trick question, as there really is no correct answer.  What is chosen depends on the business needs and the types of user that are involved.  It is something that is often overlooked though, but to my mind it is pretty important when you think about performing PST Migrations.
 
Do you have a...
Rob.Wilcox | 03 Aug 2013 | 0 comments

Although I don't use Outlook for Mac to access corporate email which is touched by Enterprise Vault any longer, I do still try to use my Mac to read mails with Outlook, and from time to time still point Outlook at one of my test environments which has EV involved.  So in keeping up to date with the happenings in Enterprise Vault + Mac + Outlook, I spotted the following technote which talks about an issue with Outlook 2011 SP 3.  Take a look to see if you are likely to be affected:

http://www.symantec.com/docs/TECH209123

Rob.Wilcox | 01 Aug 2013 | 0 comments

I just saw the following on the Symantec RSS feed, and thought that I would share it onwards.

http://www.symantec.com/docs/TECH209191

It is a hotfix related to Exchange 2013 Support, so if you have that version of Exchange - or intend to introduce it very soon, head over to the article and have a read.

Rob.Wilcox | 31 Jul 2013 | 0 comments

It seems like an obvious question, but, how would you roll-out Enterprise Vault to 2000 users? You've done a nice, simple design. You've got the storage ready, and the server deployed. You've installed all the software, configured the policies that you've agreed on. But what then?

Well one way is to simply enable all 2000 users in one go.

Is that likely to work? Sometimes maybe, but not always. 2000 users will for sure come up with some questions, and more than likely inundate the company IT HelpDesk.

The solution is really down to communication, and that needs to start, ideally, before you get to the stage of throwing the big switch to turn on the system. Involving the end-users of the system, finding advocates that will help promoting the system, and of course, they might even help teach some of their colleagues how to use various aspects of it.

Once end-users are brought on board then I would suggest rolling out Enterprise Vault...