Exchange Agent - top of information store - file is corrupt!!!!! - Veritas Backup Exec

This is a discussion on Exchange Agent - top of information store - file is corrupt!!!!! - Veritas Backup Exec ; Recently installed Backup Exec for WindowsNT/2000. Also installed exchange agent. BKUPEXEC and tape unit are on exchange server. All Backups of the exchange information store give the error ?Top of information store? is a corrupt file - file did not ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Exchange Agent - top of information store - file is corrupt!!!!!

  1. Exchange Agent - top of information store - file is corrupt!!!!!


    Recently installed Backup Exec for WindowsNT/2000. Also installed exchange
    agent. BKUPEXEC and tape unit are on exchange server. All Backups of the
    exchange information store give the error ?Top of information
    store?is a corrupt file - file did not verify
    This only happens on 5 mailboxes out of about 40. The mailboxes backup without
    any errors
    I have checked the installation of the agent against Veritas's procedure
    and it looks fine. Any ideas or comments????






  2. Re: Exchange Agent - top of information store - file is corrupt!!!!!

    Typically happens (in my experience) when the subject line is too long. Have
    the clients who have these messages move the meassages into their Personal
    Folders or delete them. I have found that although the job shows as failed
    because of this error, everything else is backed up fine.

    "NLiebl" wrote in message
    news:3986dc5a$1@hronntp01....
    >
    > Recently installed Backup Exec for WindowsNT/2000. Also installed exchange
    > agent. BKUPEXEC and tape unit are on exchange server. All Backups of the
    > exchange information store give the error ?Top of

    information
    > store?is a corrupt file - file did not verify
    > This only happens on 5 mailboxes out of about 40. The mailboxes backup

    without
    > any errors
    > I have checked the installation of the agent against Veritas's procedure
    > and it looks fine. Any ideas or comments????
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >




+ Reply to Thread