Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

ifinch001's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)

  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In Rare

Recent Badges



  1. Are there any plans to incorporate RSMF as an export format for Relativity load file exports? We have seen an increase in requests for this format.
  2. I had a question regarding embedded images on emails and if someone has a workaround, it would be appreciated. Test Environment: Intella 2.2.1 and a single email with 0 attachments, but multiple embedded images. Specifically, the embedded images are signature block pictures, a image that was copy-pasted to the email, and another of unknown origin. My goal is to be able to index that email and get a result saying that there is only a single item in the index. More specifically, I want to PREVENT Intella from peeling out the images found in an email unless they are explicitly attached to the message. If an image was a traditional attachment to the email, of course I would want that separated into its own item. Here are my tests. First, using default settings, the index resulted in 5 family items - not what I need. Second, unchecking the option in the "Add New Source" prompt under "Items" for "Index images embedded in emails and documents," the index resulted in 5 family items - again, not what I need. Based on the "?" explanation on the same page for the indexing embedded images option, I would expect this to solve my problem, but it does not. Based on what I am seeing in the metadata from the indexed email, it appears that Intella is interpreting the embedded images as attachments, which I would consider to be fundamentally incorrect. As for my question, is there any way for me as a user to manipulate the Intella indexing process in a way that prevents the split of embedded images (sig blocks are generally the biggest issue) as separate items in the index? In other words, is there something I can do in the above test that results in only a single email in the index as opposed to an email and 4 embedded images? I will say that an E-Discovery tool that we use for specific situations classifies all 4 embedded images as such and has a toggle to prevent the images from being separated as individual files from the parent email. Please let me know if this needs further clarification.
  3. Attempted to use ScanPST.exe and no luck, still hanging on the PST for multiple hours after crawling appears to end.
  4. Hello, I currently have an OST that is processing in 2.0.1 and seems to have stalled out. It spent about 2 hours actively processing about 550,000 items as I would expect, but since then, it has elapsed 16 hours with no additional items processed. Has this been encountered before and is it a known issue? Is it a bad/corrupt OST? Or am I just being impatient and there really isn't an issue? For an environment baseline, my machine has 32GBs RAM, 8 core CPU, 4 active crawlers, 2 GB memory per crawler (set in the ini file to fix a previous issue), and I have indexed PSTs/OSTs larger than this 31GB one perfectly fine. Any thoughts or suggestions appreciated. Thanks
  5. My company currently has 3 licenses of Intella and this problem persists with any computer that runs 1.9.1 and we try to export a large number of emails to a pst. This has worked perfectly fine in the past, so i don't know if 1.9.1 was the issue or if 2.0 fixed it. Regardless, I have tried different versions of Outlook (2007, 2010, and 2013), thinking that may be the issue, but it doesn't seem to matter. Here's an example situation. I have 3 internal drives, one where the case lives, one for the source evidence, and one for the export data. I have an index where I am trying to export out 50,000 items to a PST file. When the exporter gets to around 20,000 items (sometimes more, sometimes less. It is inconsistent), the exporter starts spitting errors for every item. When I open up the report file that was exported with the files, it simply says "Server response timed out" under the error column, and "skipped" under the skipped column. From some looking I've done, I can confirm that the drives aren't disconnecting. Unless Intella is the only tool that disconnects them temporarily, I use these drives on a daily basis and have no other issue. Has anyone else encountered this issue? And if so, how can I fix this? I can supply more info if need be. Thanks
  6. Thank you for the answer on this. However, I have a follow-up. Occasionally, in the FROM field, it shows just the name and email address for some messages and NOT the name and company, but for others it shows the name and company but NOT the name and email address. The behavior appears to be inconsistent. We are seeing some that show the name and email address in the FROM field for messages sent to people outside of the organization, as well as name and email address in the FROM field for messages sent to people inside of the organization. For instance, we have some messages where the FROM is "Miller, Jane <Jmiller@company.com>" ONLY and in the TO field we have "Bob Smith <BSmith@company.com>, Bob Smith </O=Company...>." No one is CCd on them. Based on the explanation provided, it would be expected to see Last Name, First Name </O=Company> in the FROM field. Those emails were exchanged within the organization only. However, we also have some messages with "Miller, Jane </O=Company...>" (so, no email address is shown) in the FROM field, followed by a TO field of "Smith, Bob </O=Company...>" (and again, no email). Those emails were exchanged within the organization only. What is the cause for the inconsistency, so that we may understand why we are seeing this behavior and be able to explain that to our clients? Is this just because one or the other field is unavailable on that particular message? Again, I can attempt to explain better if need be. Thanks
  7. Just a quick question. When I review an original email in an OST in Outlook, it has only a single name in a given field, e.g. "Bob Smith <BSmith@company.com>." However, when I process the OST in Intella (1.8.4, 1.9.1, 2.0.0 all appear to do this), there is an additional form of the name in the Preview and Contents tabs, e.g. "Bob Smith </O=Copmany...>" (See example below). In the client's eyes, it appears that the email had the individual in the TO field twice, sparking a question as to why. What original in Outlook and Intella Header tab displays: To: Bob Smith <BSmith@company.com> What Intella Contents/Preview tab and exported message in a PST displays: To: Bob Smith <BSmith@company.com>, Bob Smith </O=Company/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (*alpha-numeric characters*)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=BOB SMITH00A> I understand that this may be an Outlook thing and I understand that the "Bob Smith </O=..." is from a metadata field inside the message, but I am mostly curious as to why this additional address entry is appended to an exported email when the original does not have it (at least not in that field)? Is it pulling that metadata and then appending it to the TO field? If so, why is it doing this? Is there a need to do so when the original message does not have this format? It's not a huge issue, I would just like to be able to explain to clients the reason why there appears to be 2 of the same name in the address fields. If more clarification is needed, I can attempt to do so. Much thanks
  8. Any updates as to whether or not this will be in future versions? Or is it still a "maybe" type of feature?
  9. Coming back to this topic a year and some change later, has anything been added (or plan to be added) similar to what is mentioned here? Or any changes to deduplication in general between the 1.8 versions and 1.9 versions (particularly 1.9.2 and/or 1.9.3)? A configurable hashing formula to fit specific needs for deduplication would be phenomenal on many fronts, allowing the user to fine-tune how deduping is performed. I apologize for bringing an old topic back to life, but this problem apparently still persists for my company (same as OP).
  • Create New...