Archive Store Statistics

	Forums Register Login My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Member List Search FAQ Ticket List Log Out

Archive Store Statistics

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Archiving & Fax] >> GFI MailArchiver >> Archive Store Statistics

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Archive Store Statistics - 18.Oct.2009 4:25:35 AM

klwong

Posts: 9
Joined: 15.Jun.2007
Status: offline

Under the archive store statistics, it shows 297288 message archived but there are 297609 email indexed, i.e. number of email indexed was more than the number of email archived. Do anybody know is this a problem ?? KL

Post #: 1

RE: Archive Store Statistics - 19.Oct.2009 2:18:31 AM

roderickb

Posts: 41
Joined: 30.May2008
Status: offline

Hi klwong,

it seems that you have a corrupt index. Which version of MailArchiver are you running? Did you delete any messages directly from the database?

< Message edited by roderickb -- 19.Oct.2009 2:19:49 AM >

_____________________________

Thanks and kind regards,
Roderick Buhagiar
GFI Software Ltd

(in reply to klwong)

Post #: 2

RE: Archive Store Statistics - 19.Oct.2009 3:24:33 AM

klwong

Posts: 9
Joined: 15.Jun.2007
Status: offline

We are running version 6 build 20090205. Firebird database and no, we did not manually delete and message from the database. KL

(in reply to roderickb)

Post #: 3

RE: Archive Store Statistics - 19.Oct.2009 3:51:54 AM

roderickb

Posts: 41
Joined: 30.May2008
Status: offline

Hi klwong,

you can update to the latest version of MailArchiver and rebuild the index. Another option is to stop the search service, change the value of the memory_limit key to 10 in \Search\Data\product.config, restart the search service and Rebuild the index.

_____________________________

Thanks and kind regards,
Roderick Buhagiar
GFI Software Ltd

(in reply to klwong)

Post #: 4

RE: Archive Store Statistics - 19.Oct.2009 5:09:32 PM

klwong

Posts: 9
Joined: 15.Jun.2007
Status: offline

Roderick,
It is working after I change the memory_limit and perform a reindex. Thanks for your help. KL

(in reply to roderickb)

Post #: 5