Douglas, Reduced reboots are always a goal, and the real fix to this issue - as I understand it - is a level of consistency between what the OS needs to implement new code, new registry, and the manner in which it is applied.
Installer 3.0 is much better at this, but there are some real fundamental issues that need to be addressed before true 'no reboot patching' can be realized. Sadly, most of these issues are not related to something simple like a new patching technology, but the behavior of the code when it needs to be replaced. If you haven't looked at SP! For Server 2003 - take a look at it. It's better, but still not to the goal that you're looking for. The mid-term goal is to see ALL patches from MS written with the same patch installer - that being 3.0 and its upgrades. The next paradigm will come with the advent of what is called "hot patching" which will allow the replacement of key pieces without the need of rebooting the machine. Much of the groundwork is there - however, the OS isn't quite to the place where the kernel can be dropped hot and reinstalled with a newer version with no need to recycle the box. Many .dlls are now able to be 'hot patched'. Obviously, not everything can be. One other advent that I can see as being a potential move in the right direction on this is that MS is now treating enhancements to the OS as plug-in components. Consider RMS (Rights Management Services) for example. If you need to patch RMS, it's obviously much easier if the code is not kernel deep and not critical to the running of the OS. Others will obviously weigh in here. Hopefully, one of those folks will be ~Eric, with his clearly 'insider' info on what the overall direction in this area is. Rick Kingslan MCSE, MCSA, MCT, CISSP Microsoft MVP: Windows Server / Directory Services Windows Server / Rights Management Windows Security (Affiliate) Associate Expert Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone WebLog - www.msmvps.com/willhack4food -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Douglas M. Long Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 10:41 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Reboot necessary This is a stupid question, but wasn't a big improvement in server 2003 supposed to be reduced reboots when patching? It seems that every month's patches require a reboot, and boy is it a pain in the butt. What is the real reason that the OS needs to be rebooted for the patch installs to be complete? Is it really only the patches that modify the kernel (apparently all of the patch clusters if this is the case) that require a reboot? If the patches are patching something like IIS, or Exchange only, I would assume that a reboot would not be required, but rather the services just restarted? Just looking for a little clarification. Thanks List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
