I have a client who is getting the following on an SBS 2008 server: ESE Event ID 447 - MSExchangeIS (2276) First Storage Group: A bad page link (error -327) has been detected in a B-Tree (ObjectId: 100, PgnoRoot: 51) of database C:\Program Files\Microsoft\Exchange Server\Mailbox\First Storage Group\Mailbox Database.edb (1747970 => 1748000, 1748068). Theres another ESE error, 705, saying the online defrag terminated unexpectedly. These started on 4/9. Everything I've found mentions restoring from a backup, but then I'd have to work through recovering the mail that has flowed in the last three weeks since that date. I'd rather bring a temp exchange server online in the domain, move the mailboxes to it, shut off exchange on the old server, delete the files and start exchange to let it recreate a new database, then move the mailboxes back to it, thus getting a new uncorrupted database. The alternative is getting with MS PSS and having them resolve the existing database issue, but the client lives and dies by email, so I'm not sure that I prefer to have database maintenance running and impacting them during business hours. Database is only 16GB in size with about 1100 MB of white space, so the moves would not take long at all, easy for me to do on a Saturday without impacting anyone. But would it be better to let MS try to fix this database, when I have a relatively painless way to get a new database going with a temp server? Anyone else hit this or similar error, and what method did you do to resolve it? I've done a ton of migrations from Exchange 2003 to 2007, and 2010, but this would be my first time adding a second exchange to a domain then removing it. Any good white papers out there with good walkthroughs like there are for SBS migrations and the exchange work needed to decommission the old?

As to migrating to another server, you should ask about that in the SBS forum because SBS imposes constraints that Exchange doesn't. But it doesn't seem to me like you need another server, just a second mailbox database, to which you could move the mailboxes. That's generally the easiest way to deal with database corruption. "Repair" (ESEUTIL /P) usually results in a loss of data.Ed Crowley MVP "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems."

Actually nothing different from anything I can find or ever heard regarding extra exchange servers in an SBS environment - only DC's. This wouldn't have any DC roles. Unless there's something I never came across before? Found many references to people throwing second exchange servers in their SBS environment basically as if it was anything else, as long as the roles they install don't include active directory... And I was under the impression that only enterprise Exchange versions offered second databases? BTW, thanks for a decade of useful things - anytime I find an exchange thread with your name attached I enjoy a confidence level I don't normally have with unknown posts. ;) John

Alright, so the new mailbox database was created, mailboxes moved to it, things running well, but I can't seem to find how to force it to be "THE" database by default. I've removed the old database after running with it dismounted for several weeks, but new user creations still default to the now gone database by default so fail the exchange portion. I'm assuming somewhere I'm missing an option to set the database as default - and so far my google searches are not turning up this particular bit of information...John

Found the problem finally. Can't believe it was this simple... http://blogs.technet.com/b/sbs/archive/2009/05/27/no-exchange-mailbox-created-for-new-users-in-sbs-2008.aspx Simply had to change the mailbox name on the general tab to "Mailbox Database"...John

That sounds like an SBS thing.Ed Crowley MVP "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems."