[ngw] ATTCLIP?

Laura Buckley laurabuckley2000 at gmail.com
Fri Oct 30 07:31:05 UTC 2015


Hi Graham,

It is my understanding that the ATTCLIP Misc option does the identical
thing to putting a tick in the "File attachment check" box.

My research indicates that two passes of a Content check is required and
that it is the second one that actually removes the orphaned files.

Cheers,

Buckley



On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Graham Marsh <gm at axiom.hk> wrote:

> Hi apologies for jumping in here. Isn't the ATTCLIP for lost as well as
> orphaned attachment cleanup? Regarding the "lost" case, i.e. if an
> attachment file (under offiles) has been inadvertently removed, but the
> original message still exists, the GW client will produce an error when
> trying to open the attachment; I believe ATTCLIP removes the attachment
> reference from the message (possibly it does other things too), but as far
> as I know it's the only way to "fix" those messages for whom their
> attachment files have disappeared. Pls correct me if I'm wrong because I
> haven't thoroughly tested it.
>
> Also regarding the Content Fix both with & without the "File attachment
> check" option...my understanding is as follows:
>
> 1 - without the attachment check option, Content Fix will verify that the
> offiles file exists but does nothing else
> 2 - with the attachment check option, it calculates the checksum on the
> file to ensure it's valid (this is what takes the long time)
>
> Now to my mind, *both* options should delete orphaned offiles; it shouldn't
> be just the 2nd option that purges those redundant files because the
> checksumming process is very expensive. However, my experience seems to
> indicate that only the 2nd option actually gets rid of unneeded offiles
> files and both options should do that (i.e. for option 1, if an offiles
> file is not referenced by any message, just delete it). Again, I haven't
> done thorough experiments, so pls correct me if wrong.
>
> Thx
> GM
>
>
>
>
> On 30 October 2015 at 13:40, Laura Buckley <laurabuckley2000 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks for the information.
> >
> > Just a note about your scheduled maintenance - don't run both a Structure
> > and a Content check simultaneously. Remove Structure from your weekly
> > Content check.
> >
> > Seeing as you have not run the File attachment check in a while you might
> > see a significant amount of disk space reclaimed.  Just note that this
> > routing takes a long time to run if it has not been run in a while and is
> > very intensive on the server.  I'd run it over a weekend.
> >
> > Last year I took over a site where no maintenance had been run for
> several
> > years (267 users, 400 - 500 GB data store).  The content check with the
> > file attachment option took nearly 24 hours to complete and we reclaimed
> > nearly a third of the disk space if my memory serves me correctly.  I now
> > include that in the weekly content check and the routine completes in 4
> > hours.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Buckley
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:16 AM, Joe Brugaletta <
> > JBrugaletta at braytonlaw.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Laura,
> > > PO is about 600GB ~300 users. I'm hoping to trim the amount of time we
> > > keep emails on live system now that we have retention, but not there
> yet.
> > > It's 2 1/2 years right now, I believe. I keep having to increase the
> disk
> > > size.. users chewing through it. I don't know the last time i did an
> > > Attachment File Check.. looking at the scheduled events:
> > >
> > > We do a Weekly Analyze/Fix (Structure, Index, Content, Fix Problems on
> > > User/Message/Document checked)
> > > and a nightly Analyze/Fix (Structure, Index, Fix on User/Message)
> > > also a weekly Reduce, and weekly audit
> > >
> > >
> > > >>> Laura Buckley <laurabuckley2000 at gmail.com> 10/29/2015 10:07 PM >>>
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > As far as I am aware the ATTCLIP Misc option performs the same function
> > as
> > > the "Attachment File Check" box ticked when doing a content check with
> > > GWCheck.  I do a full content check on my POA's every weekend and
> include
> > > this switch (scheduled maintenance).  If you have not been running this
> > > sort of scheduled maintenance then you will regain space.  Perhaps let
> us
> > > know when you last ran this sort of GWCheck and what size your Post
> > Office
> > > is, how many users, etc.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Buckley
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Joe Brugaletta <
> > > JBrugaletta at braytonlaw.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't think I've ever ran this gwcheck option.. and really not
> > finding
> > > > good solid info on what it does/how to use it. My PO is getting low
> on
> > > > space, wondering if its worth doing. Any ATTCLIP gurus? GW 2014 sp2
> > here.
> > > > This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
> and
> > > > may contain confidential and privileged information. If you have
> > received
> > > > this e-mail in error, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use
> of
> > > this
> > > > communication is prohibited and we request that you contact us by
> reply
> > > > email or call us at 415-898-1555, and then destroy all copies of our
> > > > original message and any attachments.
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > ngw mailing list
> > > > ngw at ngwlist.com
> > > > http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw
> > > >
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > ngw mailing list
> > > ngw at ngwlist.com
> > > http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw
> > >
> > >
> > > This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and
> > > may contain confidential and privileged information. If you have
> received
> > > this e-mail in error, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of
> > this
> > > communication is prohibited and we request that you contact us by reply
> > > email or call us at 415-898-1555, and then destroy all copies of our
> > > original message and any attachments.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > ngw mailing list
> > > ngw at ngwlist.com
> > > http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ngw mailing list
> > ngw at ngwlist.com
> > http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ngw mailing list
> ngw at ngwlist.com
> http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw
>


More information about the ngw mailing list