I knows it is true with Windows 2003 and Windows 2008. I checked my sources and they aren't public, so I can't post them. However, you can easily find the RAM recommendations and virtual memory recommendations for both Exchange 2003 and 2007; and they match those.
However, it is also true that it's possible to run workloads in which you need both significantly more virtual memory and workloads in which you need significantly less. Any guideline is just that - a place to start your own evaluation. Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php -----Original Message----- From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 3:09 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Why is the min. rec. paging file size 1.5x? -- ME2 On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Michael B. Smith <mich...@theessentialexchange.com> wrote: > "Multi-file hack" isn't required on x64 systems. > > Minimum size should be 10 MB. 2 to 10? Hmm, I never used the minimum so I never noticed the change. Do you know which OS that updated is reflected in? > On Exchange servers the recommendation is RAM + 10MB. Personally, that's > what I set on all servers. I have been going with the RAM. Why the +10MB ? > 1.5x is a carry-over from 32MB systems and Win95. Noted, and thanks! ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
