MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 01:52:40 -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt
> <tedm at toybox.placo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
>>> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Anthony
>>> Atkielski Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 11:29 PM
>>> To: freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
>>> Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
>>>
>>
>>> If the database becomes corrupted, which is highly unlikely, you
>>> must restore it from your last backup (every mail administrator
>>> takes frequent backups, which can be done online with Exchange).
>>
>> Only if you purchase a backup software.
>
> You are totally 100% wrong.  NTBackup is included with Windows, and
> is fully supported by Microsoft.
>
>> If you want to use windows backup you must shut down exchange
>> because windows backup will not back up open files.
>
> Wrong.  Have you bothered to read Microsoft's Exchange Backup &
> Restore Guide?
>

I think they renamed it the Exchange Disaster Recovery Operations guide.

You are correct only for for 2003 server+Exchange 2003.  Not for
Exchange 2000 or Exchange 5.5 on Windows 2K or NT4.  And I will bet
that this won't work if you try loading the next version of Exchange on
2003 server, or try loading Exchange 2003 on the next version of Windows
server.

The Exchange backup functionality is not in the Windows backup utility
supplied with Server 2000 or NT4 except if you go through a clumsy
process of
first using the backup utility to backup exchange to disk, then backup
again the resultant disk file to tape.  Most people using windows backup
in those environments don't do this, instead they shut down all the
exchange
server processes, run the backup, then start them all up again.  That is
fine for a small company.  Not so fine for large enterprises.

And the other problem is that not a single previous verison of Windows
Backup or ntbackup or whatever you want to call it, is compatible with
any
other version.

Now maybe Microsoft has decided to put an end to this rubbish and in
2003 server they decided to actually go ahead and settle on a tape
format, so that our backups will actually be usable for more than a few
years.  But until they have proven they have done this - by not screwing
with the format for a few revisions of Windows - a commercial backup
software is still the only usable backup software for the large
enterprise.

Despite the studies like the one done by Radicati Group,

http://www.geekzone.co.nz/content.asp?contentid=4145

that claim Exchange 2003 has overtaken the prior versions of Exchange,
I am still seeing a vast majority of Exchange 5.5 and 2000 servers among
customers of the ISP I work at.  I therefore have to conclude that only
the large corporations with site licenses have gone ahead with Exchange
2003 upgrades, and that the smaller companies who can't afford yearly
service contracts are sticking with their working servers.  (because
our customer base is skewed to the smaller companies, as is most ISP's)
As a result the studies are skewed.

> the Exchange
> backup agents are a couple of hundred dollars.  Pretty cheap when you
> consider the value of corporate email these days

Then why is Exchange a minority (only 33%) of the market for corporate
e-mail?
(according to the study URL cited above?)

Ted