ASP Developer Network - Brought to you by Steve Radich and BitShop, Inc. - http://www.bitshop.com

ASPDeveloper

ASPDeveloper.Net / VirtualServerFAQ.COM

Make sure you go to our home page for:

* Virtual Server 2005 FAQ
* ASP.Net 2.0 Information
* ASP.Net 2.0 Streaming Tutorials
* ASP.Net 2.0 HTML based Tutorials

Made possible by Business Internet Technology Shop (BitShop)

Virtual Server 2005

Recent Virtual Server 2005 posts

* Virtual Server Performance Raid 10 vs 2 Raid 1"s (Mirror)
* issue accessing administration site
* Installing Virtual Server on different partition
* Virtual server2005 running on Vista64bit Host
* Which versions of server and client are recommended for test of Win32 apps?
* Virtual Server 2005/WSS/San Manager - No VDS Provider for Local Disks
* failed to initialize hyper-v server08
* BSOD when starting two VMs in Virtual Server
* Virtual Machine Status = Turning on.. but VM screen is blank
* Multi Monitor / Dual Head
* Linux Additions 2.0 Install Problems
* vmms.exe will not start
* Can"t configure virtual network connect to external
* No connectivity between guest servers on the same host - part II (solution)
* Remote management in a Workgroup environment
* Setup New Virtual server
* Virtual Server Service Login - Run VM under User Account
* I cannot open VS administrator web site.
* "A network cable is unplugged"
* Virtual Server Service Login - Run VM under User Account (v.VS2005

Add Solution

Virtual Server 2005 R2 host OS

Source: microsoft.public.virtualserver
Sent: 04/26/2008
From: Xavier
Message:

Hello,

Is there an advantage to run Windows 2003 Server R2 64bit instead of Wndows
2003 Server R2 32bit for the host OS of Virtual server 2005 R2? Is there any
benchmark available. Is there a best practice.

The host machine that I will use is an Intel dual quad core 3Ghz with 16 GB
of RAM. I know that the 32 bit Win2003 OS will only address up to 4GB of
Ram, but I assume that it is enough to just act as the host OS.

Any help would be great.

Thanks

Post Reply | This is Spam! | Mark as Spam

Related Messages

Re: Virtual Server 2005 R2 host OS

Sent: 04/26/2008
From: "Charlie Russel - MVP" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:

If the host OS can't see the memory, nor can any guest.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

"Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...

Show quoted text

> Hello,
>
> Is there an advantage to run Windows 2003 Server R2 64bit instead of
> Wndows
> 2003 Server R2 32bit for the host OS of Virtual server 2005 R2? Is there
> any
> benchmark available. Is there a best practice.
>
> The host machine that I will use is an Intel dual quad core 3Ghz with 16
> GB
> of RAM. I know that the 32 bit Win2003 OS will only address up to 4GB of
> Ram, but I assume that it is enough to just act as the host OS.
>
> Any help would be great.
>
> Thanks

Re: Virtual Server 2005 R2 host OS

Sent: 04/27/2008
From: Xavier
Message:

Thanks Charlie,

So it would seem that your answer is that I should go with a 64 bit OS, if I
want to take advantage of the 16GB of RAM, correct?

ALso, would you suggest using Win2K3 Standard or the Enterprise version?

Thanks for your help,

Xavier

"Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

Show quoted text

> If the host OS can't see the memory, nor can any guest.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>
>
> "Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
> > Hello,
> >
> > Is there an advantage to run Windows 2003 Server R2 64bit instead of
> > Wndows
> > 2003 Server R2 32bit for the host OS of Virtual server 2005 R2? Is there
> > any
> > benchmark available. Is there a best practice.
> >
> > The host machine that I will use is an Intel dual quad core 3Ghz with 16
> > GB
> > of RAM. I know that the 32 bit Win2003 OS will only address up to 4GB of
> > Ram, but I assume that it is enough to just act as the host OS.
> >
> > Any help would be great.
> >
> > Thanks
>

Re: Virtual Server 2005 R2 host OS

Sent: 04/27/2008
From: "Charlie Russel - MVP" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:

The only differences for your purposes between Standard and Enterprise are
the resultant licensing differences. And those are only applicable with R2.
Both x64 Editions will support >16 GB of RAM, so you'll be fine.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

"Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...

Show quoted text

> Thanks Charlie,
>
> So it would seem that your answer is that I should go with a 64 bit OS, if
> I
> want to take advantage of the 16GB of RAM, correct?
>
> ALso, would you suggest using Win2K3 Standard or the Enterprise version?
>
> Thanks for your help,
>
> Xavier
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
>
>> If the host OS can't see the memory, nor can any guest.
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>>
>>
>> "Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > Is there an advantage to run Windows 2003 Server R2 64bit instead of
>> > Wndows
>> > 2003 Server R2 32bit for the host OS of Virtual server 2005 R2? Is
>> > there
>> > any
>> > benchmark available. Is there a best practice.
>> >
>> > The host machine that I will use is an Intel dual quad core 3Ghz with
>> > 16
>> > GB
>> > of RAM. I know that the 32 bit Win2003 OS will only address up to 4GB
>> > of
>> > Ram, but I assume that it is enough to just act as the host OS.
>> >
>> > Any help would be great.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>>

Re: Virtual Server 2005 R2 host OS

Sent: 04/27/2008
From: Xavier
Message:

Thanks Charlie!

I was just under the impression that some Microsoft utilities/tools would
only work under the Enterprise version of the OS.

Xavier

"Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

Show quoted text

> The only differences for your purposes between Standard and Enterprise are
> the resultant licensing differences. And those are only applicable with R2.
> Both x64 Editions will support >16 GB of RAM, so you'll be fine.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>
>
> "Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
> > Thanks Charlie,
> >
> > So it would seem that your answer is that I should go with a 64 bit OS, if
> > I
> > want to take advantage of the 16GB of RAM, correct?
> >
> > ALso, would you suggest using Win2K3 Standard or the Enterprise version?
> >
> > Thanks for your help,
> >
> > Xavier
> >
> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
> >
> >> If the host OS can't see the memory, nor can any guest.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Charlie.
> >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
> >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
> >>
> >>
> >> "Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> >> news:(email address - cut out)...
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > Is there an advantage to run Windows 2003 Server R2 64bit instead of
> >> > Wndows
> >> > 2003 Server R2 32bit for the host OS of Virtual server 2005 R2? Is
> >> > there
> >> > any
> >> > benchmark available. Is there a best practice.
> >> >
> >> > The host machine that I will use is an Intel dual quad core 3Ghz with
> >> > 16
> >> > GB
> >> > of RAM. I know that the 32 bit Win2003 OS will only address up to 4GB
> >> > of
> >> > Ram, but I assume that it is enough to just act as the host OS.
> >> >
> >> > Any help would be great.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >>
>

Re: Virtual Server 2005 R2 host OS

Sent: 04/27/2008
From: "Charlie Russel - MVP" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:

Clustering, for example, is only available on Enterprise. And the licensing
of VMs under the R2 release of Enterprise is quite favourable. And I'm sure
there are others. But licensing isn't the subject, and all the rest are
really immaterial to what you're doing. IMHO.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

"Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...

Show quoted text

> Thanks Charlie!
>
> I was just under the impression that some Microsoft utilities/tools would
> only work under the Enterprise version of the OS.
>
> Xavier
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
>
>> The only differences for your purposes between Standard and Enterprise
>> are
>> the resultant licensing differences. And those are only applicable with
>> R2.
>> Both x64 Editions will support >16 GB of RAM, so you'll be fine.
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>>
>>
>> "Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>> > Thanks Charlie,
>> >
>> > So it would seem that your answer is that I should go with a 64 bit OS,
>> > if
>> > I
>> > want to take advantage of the 16GB of RAM, correct?
>> >
>> > ALso, would you suggest using Win2K3 Standard or the Enterprise
>> > version?
>> >
>> > Thanks for your help,
>> >
>> > Xavier
>> >
>> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
>> >
>> >> If the host OS can't see the memory, nor can any guest.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Charlie.
>> >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
>> >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>> >> news:(email address - cut out)...
>> >> > Hello,
>> >> >
>> >> > Is there an advantage to run Windows 2003 Server R2 64bit instead of
>> >> > Wndows
>> >> > 2003 Server R2 32bit for the host OS of Virtual server 2005 R2? Is
>> >> > there
>> >> > any
>> >> > benchmark available. Is there a best practice.
>> >> >
>> >> > The host machine that I will use is an Intel dual quad core 3Ghz
>> >> > with
>> >> > 16
>> >> > GB
>> >> > of RAM. I know that the 32 bit Win2003 OS will only address up to
>> >> > 4GB
>> >> > of
>> >> > Ram, but I assume that it is enough to just act as the host OS.
>> >> >
>> >> > Any help would be great.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks
>> >>
>>

Re: Virtual Server 2005 R2 host OS

Sent: 04/27/2008
From: Xavier
Message:

Perfect Thanks a lot for your help!

Xavier

"Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

Show quoted text

> Clustering, for example, is only available on Enterprise. And the licensing
> of VMs under the R2 release of Enterprise is quite favourable. And I'm sure
> there are others. But licensing isn't the subject, and all the rest are
> really immaterial to what you're doing. IMHO.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>
>
> "Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
> > Thanks Charlie!
> >
> > I was just under the impression that some Microsoft utilities/tools would
> > only work under the Enterprise version of the OS.
> >
> > Xavier
> >
> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
> >
> >> The only differences for your purposes between Standard and Enterprise
> >> are
> >> the resultant licensing differences. And those are only applicable with
> >> R2.
> >> Both x64 Editions will support >16 GB of RAM, so you'll be fine.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Charlie.
> >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
> >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
> >>
> >>
> >> "Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> >> news:(email address - cut out)...
> >> > Thanks Charlie,
> >> >
> >> > So it would seem that your answer is that I should go with a 64 bit OS,
> >> > if
> >> > I
> >> > want to take advantage of the 16GB of RAM, correct?
> >> >
> >> > ALso, would you suggest using Win2K3 Standard or the Enterprise
> >> > version?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for your help,
> >> >
> >> > Xavier
> >> >
> >> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> If the host OS can't see the memory, nor can any guest.
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Charlie.
> >> >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
> >> >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "Xavier" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> >> >> news:(email address - cut out)...
> >> >> > Hello,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Is there an advantage to run Windows 2003 Server R2 64bit instead of
> >> >> > Wndows
> >> >> > 2003 Server R2 32bit for the host OS of Virtual server 2005 R2? Is
> >> >> > there
> >> >> > any
> >> >> > benchmark available. Is there a best practice.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The host machine that I will use is an Intel dual quad core 3Ghz
> >> >> > with
> >> >> > 16
> >> >> > GB
> >> >> > of RAM. I know that the 32 bit Win2003 OS will only address up to
> >> >> > 4GB
> >> >> > of
> >> >> > Ram, but I assume that it is enough to just act as the host OS.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Any help would be great.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thanks
> >> >>
> >>
>

Post Reply | This is Spam! | Mark as Spam

Other groups

Virtual PC (Mac)(3592)	Virtual PC(12844)	Virtual PC (French)(496)
Virtual Server 2005(6245)

Our Sponsors

Virtual Server 2005 Info Here!
http://www.aspdeveloper.net

Wiki

Blogs

Articles

Image galleries

File galleries

Forums

Maps

Directories

ASP Developer Network (since 1996) - Brought to you by Steve Radich and BitShop, Inc. - http://www.bitshop.com
Copyright © 1997-2005 by BitShop, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
No content may be reproduced in any form without written permission from BitShop, Inc.
We will be honored to assist with reproduction rights on our material if you contact us.
We also can provide print articles for your magazine, private training seminars at your site, and conference presentations.
Thank you for visiting. Please bookmark our site if you found it useful!
If you wish to make a donation it will help further the development of these free resources: