I’ve a customer who is expecting – due to a business merge – a huge increase in the volume of E-mails on daily basis from 300 to 20,000. Currently the setup is one e-mail router per each organization to handle both inbound and outbound emails, no forward mail boxes. Due to that change, they are considering scalability options.
So my customer is after scalability (ability to serve more users and/or bigger volume of transactions) not availability (which is minimizing down time and making sure service “available” as needed by operations requirements).
Looking at the available resources and the Implementation guide I found references to Availability solution not Scalability as follows.
Which is basically as follows:-
Step 1: Establish the cluster Step 2: Install the E-mail Router to the active primary node in the cluster Step 3: Install the E-mail Router to the passive node in the cluster Step 4: Create the generic resource service for the cluster Step 5: Verify and monitor the cluster
Step 1: Establish the cluster
Step 2: Install the E-mail Router to the active primary node in the cluster
Step 3: Install the E-mail Router to the passive node in the cluster
Step 4: Create the generic resource service for the cluster
Step 5: Verify and monitor the cluster
What we mean here is having more than one E-mail router, installed in more than one machine, serving the same organization, and all of them are active.
Multiple routers hosting the same inbound or outbound email profiles is not officially documented in the product implementation guide or any of the white papers issued by the product team, that makes it - based on the rule of thumb “not documented not supported”- not supported.
Actually having multiple routers works fine, but the problem is the potential for duplicate inbound email activities being created or outbound emails being sent (due to not having locking mechanism to control this).
Given that fact and considering the configurations of Email router, and the below rules
Important guidance here is, we should balance the out bound spread across routers based on the amount of emails being sent from those mailboxes not just by number of mailboxes. We discovered that 90% of email volume comes from 10% of the users, not to forget auto generated emails Ex: confirming receipt of email and OOB.
Having that all said, how good is the performance of e-mail router?
I would say it’s pretty solid, and I didn’t hear about availability problems with email routers so far. Check the article Large-scale CRM email processing at Microsoft
I’d like to call out:- One e-Mail router, 83 Deployment, 24 hours, 9400 received emails, 2400 tracked in CRM 2011.
So, before deploying scalability solutions make sure you actually need it.
· This information is provided for the purpose of illustration only and is not intended to be used in a production environment. THIS INFORMATION ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND/OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.