OL2k3+Ex2k3, Shared mailbox, custom form, imported contact=slow

[Lou Zher]

Environment:
Outlook 2003 SP1 running on Windows XP Pro SP2 connected via RPC-over-HTTP
to Exchange 2003 box.
If the profile has a shared mailbox and I go to the contact folder in the
shared mailbox (ie. not my mailbox) and I open a contact that I imported that
is connected to a custom organizational form (a la setting MessageClass) it
takes 3-5 seconds to come up, but if I create a new contact in that same
folder with the same form and save it (doesn't matter who does this; the
mailbox owner or a person who has access to the shared) it comes up almost
instantly. I've been using OutlookSpy to try and figure out what is different
about these two contacts that makes the difference. I've even exported the
contacts to a PST, and imported them back in, and still they exhibit the
import=slow, created=fast behavior. We've also tried using VBA code to
'import' contacts vs. the built-in import, but we still get the slow
behavior. Note that the mailbox owner can access these contacts fast. Any
ideas?
-LZ

 

[Hollis D. Paul]

Any
ideas?

Not about the opening of the items, but a lot about spending hours to
find a fix for a 3 to 5 second delay. Presumably, you have nothing
better to do with your time.

Hollis D. Paul [MVP - Outlook]
(e-mail address removed)

Mukilteo, WA USA

 

[Lou Zher]

Presumably you have nothing better to do with your time than give unhelpful
answers, yeah?
-LZ

Any
ideas?

Not about the opening of the items, but a lot about spending hours to
find a fix for a 3 to 5 second delay. Presumably, you have nothing
better to do with your time.

Hollis D. Paul [MVP - Outlook]
(e-mail address removed)

Mukilteo, WA USA

 

[Lou Zher]

BTW everyone, this is part of an app we are building that works out to about
500 Win2k3+Ex2k3 CALs and about the same number of copies of Office 2k3. This
problem directly affects about half our users. 3 to 5 seconds doesn't sound
like a lot, but it has a huge impact on the perception of the product, esp.
when half the users are slow and can plainly see that the other half are
nearly instant.

TIA,
-LZ

 

[Peter]

I completely understand why you'd want to eliminate this delay. I'd find a 3-5-second delay very annoying in a product I use all day. Heck, I'd find it annoying in a product I use once.

Since I haven't played extensively with Exchange since Ex2k and my memory fades quickly, I'm pretty ignorant about everything you mentioned, but the phrase, "Note that the mailbox owner can access these contacts fast," triggered a thought or two.
What about permissions, and/or where Ex2k3 thinks these contacts are stored? Who imported them in the first place, the owner? what happens if you promote a non-owner to owner status an then access the contact? Do you see the same behavior across different workstations?
What I'm thinking is that perhaps Ex2k3 is initially looking somewhere else for info about the contact (because they've been imported, and information about where they've come from is still saved in the contact, or something like that), and taking a few seconds to time out, and/or the owner of the mailbox has the correct permissions for something (a query, a folder, etc...) that a non-owner doesn't have.

I may be (probably am) way off base, but your description really rings the permission/security bells in my head.

A work-around might be to write a VBScript/VBA project that iterates through all the imported contacts, saves the info, deletes the imported contact, and creates a new one with the saved info. Kinda tedious, but if the imports happen irregularly it might be a better solution that chasing the delay.

hth,

-Peter

 

[Hollis D. Paul]

Presumably you have nothing better to do with your time than give unhelpful
answers, yeah?

I was going to add that when the big boys in Blue designed CICS, they put in a
minimum response time bigger than the slowest access, so they wouldn't have
these perceptual problems. But then, my local source would not verify the
claim, so it comes down to being an urban legend. So, given that this will be
used with 500 users, and you can't achieve the fast load for all, how many
dollars will you expend in research before putting in a timer so that
everybody has the same long access rate?

Hollis D. Paul [MVP - Outlook]
(e-mail address removed)

Using Virtual Access 4.52 build 277 (32-bit), Windows 2000 build 2600
http://search.support.microsoft.com/kb/c.asp?FR=0&SD=TECH&LN=EN-US

Mukilteo, WA USA

 

[Lou Zher]

Thanks Peter, but that's not it.

I played around with owner create via import vs. sharer create via import
and that doesn't seem to matter. In other words, the owner of the item
doesn't seem to matter, but the owner of the mailbox does. I agree that it
does sound like a permissions issue except that I can create a mailbox with
just two items in it, one fast and one slow, so that doesn't match up with
the permissions theory since permissions are set at the folder level.

Your idea of using VBA was a good idea. I thought of it too. Unfortunately,
the VBA created contacts that end up acting like imported ones. I would just
have someone enter them in manually, but there are just too many contacts to
make that practical.

I started thinking that it was a caching issue and started chasing that
rabbit and found out that additional mailboxes aren't cached at all. The next
logical step was to turn off cached exchange mode to see if the problem
happens on the owner's mailbox. It does.

So, now the problem is
Cached Exchange Mode=off + custom form + imported contact = slow

Oh yeah, I should also mention that my 3-5 seconds for open was just a rough
estimate. I didn't time it until today. Actual time: 9-12 seconds! Wow. I
discounted my original estimate because I'm impatient and tend to exaggerate
response time. Anyway, it's really bad.

Here's another interesting clue:
After about ten tests on opening the slow and the fast contact, I
consistently see the fast contact only causing four packets to be sent and
received (8 total), however, the slow contacts Tx/Rx around 100 packets each
way (~200 total). Keep in mind, neither one is cached and both contacts are
small as far as item size.

And finally, the biggest clue: I'd replicated this issue across four
machines already, so it didn't appear to be machine specific, but, just
because I've got nothing better to do I tried it on four other machines in
our lab and amazingly enough they don't experience the problem. They're on
the same network and all that. There didn't appear to be any obvious
difference between these machines other than they were a little dusty from
going unloved for about four months... ah ha! They've all gone quite a while
without updates. After some experimenting, I found that all the Windows
updates are okay and don't affect anything, but Office SP1 does, which sucks
because you can't uninstall it (without removing all of Office and
reinstalling it). I started with a working 'goes fast all the time' machine,
did nothing but install Office SP1 and reconnected and it started doing the
fast/slow business.

I was hoping I could figure out which specific part of Office 2003 SP1 did
this, but I could no longer download the individual hotfixes that comprised
it. I am suspicous of KBs 833856, 838020, and 834716, but it could also be a
part that no hotfix was ever available for. The whole thing stinks of
Q331320, but I compared two otherwise identical (except for SP1) lab
machines' rpcrt4.dll and both show 5.1.2600.1361.

So Office 2003 SP1 seems to be the culprit, but I should still be able to
get around the problem if I can find a way to create items in exactly the
same way Outlook does, but so far this hasn't worked out. I'm almost
desperate enough to try something like making a keyboard-stuffing script that
plays against Outlook to create these contacts, but I'll first tinker around
with the VBA code some more.

Thanks again Peter for your ideas.
-LZ

 

[Peter]

Oh my.

I was following along pretty well, nodding my head and muttering "uh-huh" at each step, but when you starting chucking KB numbers around like a rookie in spring training, I ran for cover. ;-)

Glad you figured out what is causing your headache, hope you find the software equivalent of Advil soon. I hope that isn't waiting for SP2, either.

-Peter

 

[Hollis D. Paul]

So Office 2003 SP1 seems to be the culprit,

I've taken the liberty to post this message where some people from the
Microsoft design team will see it. They are pretty scarce with the
holidays, so I have no idea when I might get a response. I'll let you
know when that happens.

Hollis D. Paul [MVP - Outlook]
(e-mail address removed)
Mukilteo, WA USA

 

[Lou Zher]

Thanks Paul... what, got nothing better to do? jk
-LZ

So Office 2003 SP1 seems to be the culprit,

I've taken the liberty to post this message where some people from the
Microsoft design team will see it. They are pretty scarce with the
holidays, so I have no idea when I might get a response. I'll let you
know when that happens.

Hollis D. Paul [MVP - Outlook]
(e-mail address removed)
Mukilteo, WA USA

 

[Hollis D. Paul]

Thanks Paul... what, got nothing better to do? jk

Well, It's true. Like you, I am waiting on answers to questions
already submitted. The holidays are certainly playing havoc with the
response times.

But beyond that, when you isolate the culprit to Office SP1, I think
the Office people will be interested, and perhaps, concerned. You
never can tell.

Hollis D. Paul [MVP - Outlook]
(e-mail address removed)
Mukilteo, WA USA