> Arni,
>
> This is a limitation when doing online Exchange backups
> through Microsoft's backup/restore API. Microsoft does
> know that their customers still want some relief here.
>
> They acknowledged it at the Microsoft Exchange Conference
> in Atlanta but still firmly hold their ground that online
> "database level" backup and restores are the fastest
> and preserve the single-instance store architecture.
>
> With Exchange 5.5 they did alleviate some of the problems
> by offering a "Deleted Item" recovery function.
> That still isn't quite enough. So...
>
> When Exchange 2000 comes along, they are taking a few
> more steps. That is, they will have a "Deleted Mailbox"
> recovery function.  They also will allow you to
> split the Information Store into multiple "Storage Groups"
> and have multiple databases within a "Storage Group".
> The granularity for backup and restore will be at the
> database level.  This should help a great deal.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Del
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Del Hoobler
> IBM Corporation
> hoobler AT us.ibm DOT com
>
> > Hi there
> >
> > I couldn't help notice'ing that you have a quite big Exchange database,
we
> > are currently moving our Exchange backups to ADSM backup, and we keep
> > wondering if one really has to restore the whole database to recover one
> > mailbox, or even one item.  I know this is a limitation in Exchange, but
> > isn't there a way around it?  For example, some dopehead delete's his
> > mailbox, would you restore 100GB of data?
> >
> >
> > best regards
> > Arni Snorri Eggertsson
> > Iceland Telecom