| Outlook not responding [message #129466] |
Mon, 09 May 2016 15:08  |
Bud Durland
Messages: 586
Registered: December 2013
Location: Plattsburgh, NY
|
|
|
|
We're having quite a few instances of users' Outlook going into a 'not responding' state for 20-120 seconds at a time. We've done all the standard things to make the Outlook connector perform properly. However, today I noticed something new.
In the 'System Health' graphs in the administration web page, CPU is typically around 15%, and memory is at 25%, give or take. During the periods when Outlook goes "not responding", both numbers fall to 0.
This is on a 64bit Debian 7 system (guest on VMWare 5.5), 16GB of memory configured, 4 cores, and a 3TB data store (btrfs) on a SAN.
If anyone can share any experience around this, I'd appreciate it.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Outlook not responding [message #131633 is a reply to message #129466] |
Wed, 31 August 2016 23:12  |
RustyB
Messages: 90
Registered: April 2010
|
|
|
|
|
Any luck with this issue? We also are having the same problem. It seems to mostly affect users with large mailboxes (over 20 GB). Kerio 9.1, 64bit Debian (guest on VMWare 6.0), data store on a SAN.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Outlook not responding [message #131694 is a reply to message #129466] |
Tue, 06 September 2016 14:56 |
Jono2016
Messages: 5
Registered: August 2016
|
|
|
|
I have also experienced this issue. You will find several forum posts that describe exactly the same problem (poor Outlook performance) especially when searching and/or switching folders.
I would link you to one of these threads, but the forum does not permit the use of links until I have posted more than 5 messages, why!
The suggestion is to follow the KB article entitled "Optimizing performance with Kerio Outlook Connector Offline" but I have never found these steps to have any impact on performance.
As is often mentioned in other forum posts, the only way to resolve these issues is to store the cache on an SSD drive. We installed a 120GB Kingston SSD as a secondary drive and moved the cache over to this following the KB entitled "How to modify store location for the kerio outlook connector offline" and the problems appear to have gone in our tests. Users have reported improved overall performance of Outlook.
SSD is not listed as a minimum requirement. We shouldn't need purchase an SSD for each machine running the KOFF in order to resolve these performance issue. Clearly the KOFF is hitting the drive very hard. There is some suggestion that running a different email client such as eM Client will also solve the problem, but Outlook is the standard business email client and Kerio should work to fix the issues with this first rather than just using SSD/other email client as a solution.
I'm surprised more people aren't reporting this issue. Perhaps they are, just not on the forums.
Kerio need to come up with a fix for this and fast.
[Updated on: Tue, 06 September 2016 14:58] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Outlook not responding [message #131698 is a reply to message #131694] |
Tue, 06 September 2016 21:08 |
RustyB
Messages: 90
Registered: April 2010
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the reply. Many of our users share email folders with other users, and I couldn't find an easy way to view these using eM Client, so I am not sure if this will work for us. I also tried the suggestions in the article "Optimizing performance with Kerio Outlook Connector Offline" with no luck. And of course upgrading every user to SSD is not an option.
Because this seems to mainly affect users with large mailboxes, we are looking into MailStore as an option for archiving old emails and getting user's mailbox size down. We will see if this makes a difference in performance.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Outlook not responding [message #131705 is a reply to message #131698] |
Wed, 07 September 2016 09:04 |
Jono2016
Messages: 5
Registered: August 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Unless archiving significantly reduces the size of your users mailboxes, I would be surprised if you notice any significant difference. We have relatively small mailboxes and we still have the performance issues I'm afraid. It's just not good enough.
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
