Exchange should not be in the business of patching kernels. It's just bad form.
That said, it's not clear to me what the "right" answer is either. You want to get people the fix that need it but you don't want to go out there and start swapping kernel components on a user. That's just not the right way for a piece of software to work. How would the SBS crowd feel if an app changed the kernel out from under them? You run a lot of apps on that box. I think the options we have today are: readme + ExBPA + perhaps offering the patch via WU when we see Exchange installed. But the last point there is contentious, I know....it's merely an option to consider and give us feedback on. :) I remember watching this issue being debugged when it was hit and it's worth proactively patching. Exchange put a lot of energy in to finding this one and getting root cause + a fix prior to RTM. Hard issue to hit, but not impossible either. Honestly, on this one, I think they served their customers well. ~Eric -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 8:47 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT: Who needs that much ram anyway? Personally I was surprised that a Windows 2003 server and Exchange 2007 would need a patch to run more than 4 gigs because "This problem occurs because of a problem in the Windows kernel" Seems to me in the x64 era, we're all going to be running more than 4 gigs so they should bundle this up in the Exchange 2007 installer from the get go rather than having everyone stumble across a KB article. I'm assuming it's discussed in the readme that no one reads? Brian Desmond wrote: > The more you can get in memory, the better. 32GB is the threshold for > Exchange before it stops making sense. > > I've remoted into SQL servers with dozens of CPUs and dozens of gigs of > ram before... > > Thanks, > Brian Desmond > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > c - 312.731.3132 > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:ActiveDir- >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - >> SBS Rocks [MVP] >> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 4:01 AM >> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org >> Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Who needs that much ram anyway? >> >> >> The Microsoft Exchange Information Store service stops responding on >> a >> computer that is running Windows Server 2003 and Exchange Server >> > 2007 > >> http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=928368 >> >> This problem occurs if Exchange Server 2007 is installed on a computer >> that has more than 4 gigabytes (GB) of RAM. >> >> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx >> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx >> List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx >> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx > > -- Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days? http://www.threatcode.com If you are a SBSer and you don't subscribe to the SBS Blog... man ... I will hunt you down... http://blogs.technet.com/sbs List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
