No, I'm not. I just read *all* the q-articles that pertain to the issue. That article pertains to Windows 2000 Advanced Server only. I don't use Advanced Server.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q314736 "The /3GB switch can have a significant effect on memory fragmentation and even contribute to memory fragmentation on a server that runs Windows 2000 Server (but not on a server that runs Windows 2000 Advanced Server or Microsoft Windows 2000 Datacenter Server). You should not use this switch with Windows 2000 Server." > -----Original Message----- > From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 05:03 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT > > > And MS has published a Q article with the following title: > XGEN: Exchange 2000 Requires /3GB Switch with More Than 1 > Gigabyte of Physical RAM > > You are braver than I, Tom! > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ayers, Diane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 3:05 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT > > > Cool. Unfortunately once messaging becomes a mission > critical application in the enterprise, I can not ignore > errors reported by the operating system. YMMV however... > > Diane > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:57 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT > > > I disagree, in theory and in practice. The "problem" I > experience is that it logs an event telling me it's > fragmented. Which I ignore. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ayers, Diane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:03 PM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT > > > > > > I agree with Ken. We ran into a memory fragmentation problem > > with E2K on Win2K standard server. If you have more than 1 > > GB of memory with E2K, you need to run Win2K advanced. > > > > Thread Drify Diane > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:45 AM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT > > > > > > Yes, it can "handle" it, but it won't use it in a meaningful > > way. Windows 2000 will only allocate a max of 2GB of address > > space to applications using the rest for operating system use > > unless the "/3GB" is used in the boot.ini file (available in > > advance server only). > > > > Indeed, some applications (like exchange) get confused if > > there is more memory in the machine than it can get to. See > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q266096 > > for details. This Q article is for exchange 2000, but I think > > it applies to 5.5 as well. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:24 AM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT > > > > > > W2k Server can handle up to 4GB of Mem before you need to go > > to ADV Server > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:20 PM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT > > > > You would also need advance server if your server has more > > than 2GB or so of memory. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT > > > > > > But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT > > > > You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM > > > To: ActiveDir (E-mail) > > > Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT > > > > > > > > > Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps > to upgrade > > > from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? > > > > > > Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced > Server right? I > > > read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT > version of > > > 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. > > > > > > Justin A. Salandra, MCSE > > > Senior Network Engineer > > > Catholic Healthcare System > > > 914.681.8117 office > > > 646.483.3325 cell > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > > > List archive: > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > > List archive: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > > > List info : > > http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > > List archive: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > > > List info : > > http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > > List archive: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > > > List info : > > http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > > List archive: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > > > List info : > > http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > > List archive: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > > > List info : > > http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > > List archive: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : > http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : > http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
