Hello, I work for an IT services company. My boss has (for years) been taking backups of the exchange database manually every night. To do this, he runs a script that stops the exchange services, copies the exchange database directory to an alternative location, and then restarts the exchange services again. I HATE this system because it shouldn't be necessary!! I have never done this before in my whole career, and I was just wondering if anyone here can give me some advice. Does this risk causing problems for the exchange database? I would MUCH prefer to simply use the VSS to backup the whole drive, but my boss still wants to do this. Can you help me convince him? Thanks. Nicholas Cross

Hello, the main problem with this manual backup is that the transaction logs aren't purged. You need both database and logs for the restore. The logs are purged when doing a backup (full or incremental). From this point you just need to restore the database and the logs being created since the last backup. Another advantage would be that the database is checked for consistency with a proper backup so you can ensure it's not logically damaged. Prior to Exchange 2010 this is critical but with Exchange 2010 there is a process called "24 x 7 ESE-Scan" which scans the databases live. Of course your boss has the advantage that he doesn't have to start the backup manually and so saves much time. Greetings, Toni

On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 18:53:59 +0000, da_doni wrote: >the main problem with this manual backup is that the transaction logs aren't purged. You need both database and logs for the restore. If the boss is assuming that the database is in a clean state then the log files wouldn't be needed. That's a big assumption, though. >The logs are purged when doing a backup (full or incremental). From this point you just need to restore the database and the logs being created since the last backup. How much would you bet that circular logging is enabled? ;-) Would you wager more that the restore part of the backup/restore plan has never been tested? >Another advantage would be that the database is checked for consistency with a proper backup so you can ensure it's not logically damaged. Prior to Exchange 2010 this is critical but with Exchange 2010 there is a process called "24 x 7 ESE-Scan" which scans the databases live. > >Of course your boss has the advantage that he doesn't have to start the backup manually and so saves much time. Yeah, but it makes him feel like he knows what he's doing if he does it his way! --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP

I dont believe that is a suported way to backup exchange.Sukh

Thanks for the answers. Sadly, this doesn't actually help me because to be honest I was hoping that someone would come up with a reason (that I am not aware of) why this could actually cause problems. I haven't checked if Circular logging is still active. Would this cause a problem? THB... there are all sorts of things that my boss does that I would never do. I have been in charge if IT infrastructures for over 10 years, and have never had any problems, but my boss (I changed employer recently) insists on doing all sorts of things that I don't like. He gives every machine a fixed IP address rather than using DHPC. I says this is because otherwise people cannot connect remotely to their machines (we have a lot a clients that use Small Business Server). I know that this isn't the case because I have implemented it for lots of old clients, and it always works fine. He also refuses to install any security updates one the servers have been delivered to the clients. He says that they cause too many problems. I don't like this, but.... he is my boss. If anyone knows of a reason why starting and stopping the exchange services (it is done through a .bat file that is scheduled to run every day) risks causing a problem, PLEASE let me know. Many thanks in advance. Nick

On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:30:54 +0000, nebc100 wrote: >Sadly, this doesn't actually help me because to be honest I was hoping that someone would come up with a reason (that I am not aware of) why this could actually cause problems. It won't *cause* problems, but it won't report them either. If you have a defective sector on the disk, or the controller flipped a sufficient number of bits during a write, the checksum for the database page will be incorrect. The only way to fix that is to restore the database from a backup that doesn't have the problem. Of course you may not discover the problem if you never run eseutil on the database, anf by the time you _do_ find the problem you've already overwritten the last good backup (you didn't mention how many generations of the database your boss saves). >I haven't checked if Circular logging is still active. Would this cause a problem? It won't cause a problem as long as nothing goes wrong. But if you have to restore a damaged database you'll have lost all the changes to the database between the time the copy was made (or the time the last GOOD copy was made) and the time of the failure. >THB... there are all sorts of things that my boss does that I would never do. I have been in charge if IT infrastructures for over 10 years, and have never had any problems, but my boss (I changed employer recently) insists on doing all sorts of things that I don't like. He gives every machine a fixed IP address rather than using DHPC. I says this is because otherwise people cannot connect remotely to their machines (we have a lot a clients that use Small Business Server). I know that this isn't the case because I have implemented it for lots of old clients, and it always works fine. Assigning IP addresses with DHCP (unless its done with a reservation) to a server isn't such a good idea. Depending on how your firewall is set up (does it use DNS to locate machines on the interior network? Is scavaging enabled on DNS?) you _may_ have problems. OTOH, if the DHCP ranges are handing out routable addresses to client machines and the firewalls allow direct access to them you have a bigger problem! >He also refuses to install any security updates one the servers have been delivered to the clients. He says that they cause too many problems. I don't like this, but.... he is my boss. Well, blindly installing things without testing them isn't such a great idea for infrastructure machines. Clients, not so much. But *never* installing them sounds like he's never had to deal with something like "slammer" or a web site that's been subject to a SQL injection attack (or worse). >If anyone knows of a reason why starting and stopping the exchange services (it is done through a .bat file that is scheduled to run every day) risks causing a problem, PLEASE let me know. Stopping and starting services isn't going to hurt anything -- unless, for whatever reason, the shutdown left the database in a dirty shutdown state. The log files are usually sufficient to recover from that, but if there's a missing log file or the *.chk file is hosed then the database won't mount. --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP

On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:30:54 +0000, nebc100 wrote: >Sadly, this doesn't actually help me because to be honest I was hoping that someone would come up with a reason (that I am not aware of) why this could actually cause problems. It won't *cause* problems, but it won't report them either. If you have a defective sector on the disk, or the controller flipped a sufficient number of bits during a write, the checksum for the database page will be incorrect. The only way to fix that is to restore the database from a backup that doesn't have the problem. Of course you may not discover the problem if you never run eseutil on the database, anf by the time you _do_ find the problem you've already overwritten the last good backup (you didn't mention how many generations of the database your boss saves). >I haven't checked if Circular logging is still active. Would this cause a problem? It won't cause a problem as long as nothing goes wrong. But if you have to restore a damaged database you'll have lost all the changes to the database between the time the copy was made (or the time the last GOOD copy was made) and the time of the failure. >THB... there are all sorts of things that my boss does that I would never do. I have been in charge if IT infrastructures for over 10 years, and have never had any problems, but my boss (I changed employer recently) insists on doing all sorts of things that I don't like. He gives every machine a fixed IP address rather than using DHPC. I says this is because otherwise people cannot connect remotely to their machines (we have a lot a clients that use Small Business Server). I know that this isn't the case because I have implemented it for lots of old clients, and it always works fine. Assigning IP addresses with DHCP (unless its done with a reservation) to a server isn't such a good idea. Depending on how your firewall is set up (does it use DNS to locate machines on the interior network? Is scavaging enabled on DNS?) you _may_ have problems. OTOH, if the DHCP ranges are handing out routable addresses to client machines and the firewalls allow direct access to them you have a bigger problem! >He also refuses to install any security updates one the servers have been delivered to the clients. He says that they cause too many problems. I don't like this, but.... he is my boss. Well, blindly installing things without testing them isn't such a great idea for infrastructure machines. Clients, not so much. But *never* installing them sounds like he's never had to deal with something like "slammer" or a web site that's been subject to a SQL injection attack (or worse). >If anyone knows of a reason why starting and stopping the exchange services (it is done through a .bat file that is scheduled to run every day) risks causing a problem, PLEASE let me know. Stopping and starting services isn't going to hurt anything -- unless, for whatever reason, the shutdown left the database in a dirty shutdown state. The log files are usually sufficient to recover from that, but if there's a missing log file or the *.chk file is hosed then the database won't mount. --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP

On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:30:54 +0000, nebc100 wrote: >Sadly, this doesn't actually help me because to be honest I was hoping that someone would come up with a reason (that I am not aware of) why this could actually cause problems. It won't *cause* problems, but it won't report them either. If you have a defective sector on the disk, or the controller flipped a sufficient number of bits during a write, the checksum for the database page will be incorrect. The only way to fix that is to restore the database from a backup that doesn't have the problem. Of course you may not discover the problem if you never run eseutil on the database, anf by the time you _do_ find the problem you've already overwritten the last good backup (you didn't mention how many generations of the database your boss saves). >I haven't checked if Circular logging is still active. Would this cause a problem? It won't cause a problem as long as nothing goes wrong. But if you have to restore a damaged database you'll have lost all the changes to the database between the time the copy was made (or the time the last GOOD copy was made) and the time of the failure. >THB... there are all sorts of things that my boss does that I would never do. I have been in charge if IT infrastructures for over 10 years, and have never had any problems, but my boss (I changed employer recently) insists on doing all sorts of things that I don't like. He gives every machine a fixed IP address rather than using DHPC. I says this is because otherwise people cannot connect remotely to their machines (we have a lot a clients that use Small Business Server). I know that this isn't the case because I have implemented it for lots of old clients, and it always works fine. Assigning IP addresses with DHCP (unless its done with a reservation) to a server isn't such a good idea. Depending on how your firewall is set up (does it use DNS to locate machines on the interior network? Is scavaging enabled on DNS?) you _may_ have problems. OTOH, if the DHCP ranges are handing out routable addresses to client machines and the firewalls allow direct access to them you have a bigger problem! >He also refuses to install any security updates one the servers have been delivered to the clients. He says that they cause too many problems. I don't like this, but.... he is my boss. Well, blindly installing things without testing them isn't such a great idea for infrastructure machines. Clients, not so much. But *never* installing them sounds like he's never had to deal with something like "slammer" or a web site that's been subject to a SQL injection attack (or worse). >If anyone knows of a reason why starting and stopping the exchange services (it is done through a .bat file that is scheduled to run every day) risks causing a problem, PLEASE let me know. Stopping and starting services isn't going to hurt anything -- unless, for whatever reason, the shutdown left the database in a dirty shutdown state. The log files are usually sufficient to recover from that, but if there's a missing log file or the *.chk file is hosed then the database won't mount. --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP Thanks for your answer. Your comments about comment about the "checksum" is a good comment that I hadn't thought about. I think that I explained badly regarding the IP addresses. Of course the server has a fixed IP address. I meant that all the workstations have fixed IP addresses. I have always (for more than 10 years) used DHCP for the workstations, and used fixed for devices like Printers, routers, switches etc. I know that it won't cause a problem having fixed IP addresses, but it increases the maintenance costs (we charge our customers for the time involved). It comes down to the same thing with the Security updates... I used (when I worked as an independant consultant) to run the tests on my system, and when I knew that they wouldn't cause problems, I would then install them for my clients. There are also other things that my boss does, like he refuses to use exchange as it is intended. He won't let any e-mails come in to exchange. He always sets up the mail system so the e-mails go in to a provider (very often hosted by the company that I work for) and then he installs a POP connector to deliver the mails to the server. Oh well... I can't complain too much... the compan pays me well ;) thanks for your comments!!!!! Best regards. Nicholas Cross

On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:30:54 +0000, nebc100 wrote: >Sadly, this doesn't actually help me because to be honest I was hoping that someone would come up with a reason (that I am not aware of) why this could actually cause problems. It won't *cause* problems, but it won't report them either. If you have a defective sector on the disk, or the controller flipped a sufficient number of bits during a write, the checksum for the database page will be incorrect. The only way to fix that is to restore the database from a backup that doesn't have the problem. Of course you may not discover the problem if you never run eseutil on the database, anf by the time you _do_ find the problem you've already overwritten the last good backup (you didn't mention how many generations of the database your boss saves). >I haven't checked if Circular logging is still active. Would this cause a problem? It won't cause a problem as long as nothing goes wrong. But if you have to restore a damaged database you'll have lost all the changes to the database between the time the copy was made (or the time the last GOOD copy was made) and the time of the failure. >THB... there are all sorts of things that my boss does that I would never do. I have been in charge if IT infrastructures for over 10 years, and have never had any problems, but my boss (I changed employer recently) insists on doing all sorts of things that I don't like. He gives every machine a fixed IP address rather than using DHPC. I says this is because otherwise people cannot connect remotely to their machines (we have a lot a clients that use Small Business Server). I know that this isn't the case because I have implemented it for lots of old clients, and it always works fine. Assigning IP addresses with DHCP (unless its done with a reservation) to a server isn't such a good idea. Depending on how your firewall is set up (does it use DNS to locate machines on the interior network? Is scavaging enabled on DNS?) you _may_ have problems. OTOH, if the DHCP ranges are handing out routable addresses to client machines and the firewalls allow direct access to them you have a bigger problem! >He also refuses to install any security updates one the servers have been delivered to the clients. He says that they cause too many problems. I don't like this, but.... he is my boss. Well, blindly installing things without testing them isn't such a great idea for infrastructure machines. Clients, not so much. But *never* installing them sounds like he's never had to deal with something like "slammer" or a web site that's been subject to a SQL injection attack (or worse). >If anyone knows of a reason why starting and stopping the exchange services (it is done through a .bat file that is scheduled to run every day) risks causing a problem, PLEASE let me know. Stopping and starting services isn't going to hurt anything -- unless, for whatever reason, the shutdown left the database in a dirty shutdown state. The log files are usually sufficient to recover from that, but if there's a missing log file or the *.chk file is hosed then the database won't mount. --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP Thanks for your answer. Your comments about comment about the "checksum" is a good comment that I hadn't thought about. I think that I explained badly regarding the IP addresses. Of course the server has a fixed IP address. I meant that all the workstations have fixed IP addresses. I have always (for more than 10 years) used DHCP for the workstations, and used fixed for devices like Printers, routers, switches etc. I know that it won't cause a problem having fixed IP addresses, but it increases the maintenance costs (we charge our customers for the time involved). It comes down to the same thing with the Security updates... I used (when I worked as an independant consultant) to run the tests on my system, and when I knew that they wouldn't cause problems, I would then install them for my clients. There are also other things that my boss does, like he refuses to use exchange as it is intended. He won't let any e-mails come in to exchange. He always sets up the mail system so the e-mails go in to a provider (very often hosted by the company that I work for) and then he installs a POP connector to deliver the mails to the server. Oh well... I can't complain too much... the compan pays me well ;) thanks for your comments!!!!! Best regards. Nicholas Cross

On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 08:33:27 +0000, nebc100 wrote: [ snip ] >Thanks for your answer. Your comments about comment about the "checksum" is a good comment that I hadn't thought about. > >I think that I explained badly regarding the IP addresses. Of course the server has a fixed IP address. I meant that all the workstations have fixed IP addresses. I have always (for more than 10 years) used DHCP for the workstations, and used fixed for devices like Printers, routers, switches etc. > >I know that it won't cause a problem having fixed IP addresses, but it increases the maintenance costs (we charge our customers for the time involved). Increasing billable hours isn't a bad thing! If that's what the customer wants then go with it. If it's what your boss wants and the customer doesn't object, well . . . >It comes down to the same thing with the Security updates... I used (when I worked as an independant consultant) to run the tests on my system, and when I knew that they wouldn't cause problems, I would then install them for my clients. > >There are also other things that my boss does, like he refuses to use exchange as it is intended. He won't let any e-mails come in to exchange. He always sets up the mail system so the e-mails go in to a provider (very often hosted by the company that I work for) and then he installs a POP connector to deliver the mails to the server. Ugh! I _might_ use one of those POP3 connectors under duress, but never for long, and never for any of the most often given reasons for using them. You could always you a 3rd-party SMTP relay (e.g yours) if the rationale is that e-mail shouldn't remain in the sender's system if the customer's isn't available. >Oh well... I can't complain too much... the compan pays me well ;) > > > >thanks for your comments!!!!! > > > >Best regards. > > > >Nicholas Cross --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP