Please Read: Significant Update Planned, Migrating Forum Software This Month

See more
See less

Free/Busy Calendar Data...

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Free/Busy Calendar Data...


    I have read the following article and have a couple of questions.

    If we extend the period of which this data is available, would it increase the amount of network traffic too much and is why the default set by Microsoft is only 2 months?

    I personally can't see it being an issue (as you have access to an infinite amount of data if you simply File > Open > Other User's Calendar... but thought i would ask anyway in case i have overlooked something.

    Thanks in advance.

  • #2
    Re: Free/Busy Calendar Data...

    I guess i should've opened my eyes.

    Not to worry, i have the answer now


    • #3
      Re: Free/Busy Calendar Data...

      Would be appreciated if you could post the answer just in case anyone else is searching?

      Please read this before you post:

      Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


      • #4
        Re: Free/Busy Calendar Data...

        It is linked to Public Folders.

        You should have one called Schedule+ Free Busy Information.

        By default, every 15 minutes all Outlook Clients will synchronise 2 months worth of calendar data to that Public Folder.

        How it will effect you depends on your environment and how often people actually bother to use their Calendars for appointments.

        We have roughly 2,500 users in our environment and the default 2 month synchronisation causes that Public Folder to be 989kb in size with a total of 2,332 items.

        Assuming there is no growth in the amount of items per month per user, if we extend the data period to 12 months then the Public Folder will grow to 5,934kb and 12,992 items.

        This means it would need to synchronise 6mb of data across the network every 15 minutes (if the default is kept, but this can be changed to hours if necessary).

        You should know what your infrastructure should be able to handle, so just by a couple of estimates you should be able to determine how much data would need to be synchronised and whether or not it will cause an issue.

        We have not tried extending it yet, but this is our estimates after some research...

        Once we actually go ahead of the change, i will update the post to say if there has been any performance issues.