Michael, You brought up a great point. I've been receiving some resistance from our SAN engineer that dedicate IOPS per server aren't necessary because of caching. I'm working on getting confirmation from EMC that caching should NOT be worked into any caculations (I've never seen any that take caching into consideration). To be more clear on BES, not all users will be BES, but we don't yet know what amount will be. Teo On 3/7/06, Michael B. Smith <michael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > http://www.MSExchange.org/ <http://www.msexchange.org/> > > So 4,000 * 0.6 = 2,400 IOPS. > > > > That equates to a LOT of spindles. > > > > Don't let ANYONE tell you that caching will help. It absolutely does not > with Exchange and mailstores of that size. You need that IOPS in raw > capacity. Blackberry definitely pushes the number slightly higher, > synchronization not so much (unless you have multiple desktops synchronizing > a single mailbox). Google desktop should be avoided by policy. > > > > Now, all that being said – 0.6 is a pretty high number for an average > user. > > > ------------------------------ > > >