Restores with brick level backups should not correupt the Exchange
database.
VERITAS is doing standard MAPI calls; nothing fancy that would cause
trouble
with Exchange.


"Henry Kumagai" wrote in message
news:388e4190@hronntp01....
>
> I have heard brick level restores are bad, not necessarily the backup

of
the
> individual mailbox. It's the restore that corrupts the Exchange

database.
> With that said, you should do brick level backups to give you one

more
restore
> option in an absolute "emergency" situation, when all else has failed.

Would
> you agree?
>
> "Todd" wrote:
> >If you were smart you would not backup Exchange with Bricks. Bricks

are
> >bad. You should setup your Exchange box correctly with deletion

times.
> >These hold deleted messages for a certain period of time, you can

always
> >restore then without going to tape. You can set an indefinate time,

all
> >depends on your drive space.
> >
> >Todd
> >
> >
> >Brad Oldham wrote in message

news:3873c107@hronntp01....
> >>
> >> We're going to be switching to Exchange this year.
> >>
> >> We are aware that Backup Exec's Exchange Agent is suppose to allow

> >individual
> >> restores of mailboxes.
> >>
> >> When a backup occurs of an Exchange server, is each mailbox backed

up
> >individually?
> >> Say someone sends a message with a 10 meg attachment out to

everyone
> in
> >> a post office. Will this 10 meg attachment get backed up multiples

times
> >> (one time for each user in the postoffice?)
> >>
> >> It seems to me that the file would be backed up multiple

> >times...otherwise,
> >> when doing a restore, the tape would have to be accessed somewhat

randomly
> >> to get all the messages for an individual's mailbox.
> >>
> >> I would appreciate any info from people who know how this thing

works.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Brad

> >
> >

>