GroupWise recoverability issues are the same, if not worse than
Exchange. Exchange can and does recover automatically in the
event of a server crash. The majority of the time, this automatic
recovery is successful, and no-one ever knows. The recovery is
also very fast, and the damage from crashing is usually minimal.
The GroupWise domain/post office databases, on the other hand,
are guaranteed to be corrupted in the event of a crash, and the
recovery is a manual procedure that requires all the users to be
out of the mail system, and all mail services (NLM's) to be stopped.
To quote Novell technical document 2929412:
"This is highly recommended whenever a server abends containing the
GroupWise data store which most likely was compromised from the abend
on your system. Also recommended for periodical maintenance."
[... hideous manual recovery procedure deleted...]
"Again, this is highly recommended whenever a server abends containing
the GroupWise data store which most likely was compromised from the
abend on your system."
The upshot is, all contemporary messaging systems have centralized
message stores that have data shared by multiple users. This
does have serious disaster recovery implications. But it is the
recovery methodology and database design that separates Microsoft
from the others.
I think it is also worth noting here that GroupWise 5.x wasn't
a very stable product until recently, with 5.2, and the 5.0
release (which I never recommended anyway) is rather notorious
for crashing (especially the post office NLM), creating its own
corrupt database recovery situtation.
Business Information Technologies, Inc.
> > I don't know anything about Groupwise, but I think you should consider:
> > Nowadays, Exchange is a breeze to set up. We actually don't want to be
> > Exchange gurus, and it seems we have succeeded, but can do just about
> > everything w/out reading manuals.
> > Exchange supports nearly all internet standards, including LDAP and IMAP,
> > POP, NNTP, etc...
> > Exchange has an incredibly powerful development environment, in which it
> > takes literally minutes to set up some pretty sophistocated apps using
> > Forms and/or custom folders.
> > If you need to go beyond simple Folder Customization/Form Design,
> > Exchange is programmable using a WIDE ARRAY of standard development tools
> > (such as Visual Basic, Visual C++, Java, etc..). I am sure that
> > Groupwise cannot rival this.
> > In short, Groupwise may offer very nice canned functionality, but I would
> > be hard pressed to believe that it is as powerful/flexible, or that it is
> > much easier to set up and/or administer. If it were an order of
> > magnitude cheaper than Exchange, then that might be a consideration.
> Coming from someone who has experience on Exchange since the betas, MS Mail,
> Groupwise, and Notes:
> Exchange has some major problems when it comes to data recovery. Since it
> stores all mail for all users in a single file, PRIV.EDB, a small amount of
> data corruption trashes the lot. Also, when a users mailbox is deleted
> accidently (it happens sometimes), there's no simple way of recovering it.
> With Groupwise, each user has a database, and all messages are also stored
> in message databases. It's possible to delete all user databases and still
> recreate them from the message databases, and vice versa. Message tracking
> from the client is also pathetic compared to Groupwise - from Groupwise,
> without doing anything extra, you can track when the message was sent, what
> server it went to, when it was received, when it was opened, when it was
> deleted or replied to.