Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3
I took that as meaning it was his only Exchange server as he only referenced priv and pub when he stated it hosted everything. In either case, Martin led him in the perfect direction. The Exchange BPA should give him most of the insight he needs. - Sean On 5/27/08, Matt Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He did actually infer it, the second paragraph: On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sean, that was another article I was reading as well. So I jumped ahead to fast and after reading a few other docs; correct me if I am wrong. But the /userva switch, should I monitor the memory performance after implementing the /3GB and then determine if the PTEs drop then implement? The reason I ask this (may sound dumb) but our EX2K3 is our only server and everything is hosted on it, priv and pub. Our organization is limited on funds and cannot follow MS' best practices. TIA Thomas M -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 8:27 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Sean Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Very informative post, but I didn't catch the part where the OP stated his Exchange server was also a DC. I didn't mean to imply that our situation was identical to his. Those were notes, not advice. :) -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. Here's my notes from when we upgraded to a new server, which had 4 GB RAM. At the time, we were running Windows 2000 Server Standard and Exchange 2000 Enterprise. As I recall, things weren't any different for Exchange 2003. Server 2003 supports the /4GB switch even for Standard, so that may make a difference. Summary --- New server has: - 4 GB of RAM - Windows 2000 Server Standard - Exchange 2000 Enterprise - Active Directory Domain Controller and Global Catalog - Several other applications Should we use the /3GB switch in the BOOT.INI file on server? Short answer: No Quick Background i386 = 32-bit 32-bit = 4 GB By default, Windows on i386 splits the virtual address space into 2 GB for userland and 2 GB for the kernel. The /3GB switch changes this to give 3 GB to userland and 1 GB to the kernel. This means processes can have a larger virtual address space, at the cost of cutting kernel virtual address space in half. Reducing the kernel address space is not without penalties. Quick Explanation - 1. On a system doing many different things, there is little to no benefit in depriving the kernel of address space it could use for caching in RAM. 1a. Exchange generally only benefits from the extra address space on a dedicated Exchange box. Less kernel memory is needed since the only thing the box is doing is running Exchange, not managing many different things. 2. The /3GB switch is not supported on Win 2000 Srvr Std. It is supported on Win 2003 Srvr and Win 2000 Srvr Enterprise, but we don't have those. 2a. It isn't worth upgrading to Win 2000 Srvr Ent because of Point 1, above. Notes - 4GT = 4 gigabyte tuning. The /3GB switch turns this on. Virtual address space (the memory a process can address) is not the same as the physical address space (the amount of RAM the machine can address). With /3GB enabled, a program still has to request the larger memory space, or it will still be limited to 2 GB. This is a backwards compatabiltiy hack to let programs which assume a 2 GB userland keep working. This has nothing to do with PAE (physical address extension). PAE changes the 32-bit physical address space to a 36-bit physical address space. It lets the machine address more RAM. The amount of RAM the machine can address has nothing to do with the address space of a running process. This has nothing to do with page files (swap files), which are sometimes called Virtual Memory. That kind of virtual memory has nothing to do with virtual addres space (which is also sometimes called virtual memory). Detailed Analysis - REF1 states that If you're working with Exchange Server and another application that doesn't know about large memory spaces, that other program will not be able to use any of the additional memory provided by /3GB. In particular, Exchange plus an AD DC means one should not use /3GB switch. REF2 enforces this, in particular pointing out things like antivirus software and database servers, which also tend to be memory hungry. REF2 also provides some very useful looking pointers to info on how to tune Windows and Exchange for more balanced memory operation. REF3 further enforces the kernel/userland tradeoffs, noting that It is possible to run out of kernel memory well before running out of user memory, or vice versa. MSKB 315407 provides a registry hack that tweaks the OS memory manager in a way that helps reduced memory fragmentation with large RAMs. MSKB 266768 tells how to monitor the Exchange IS to make sure memory allocations are within safe boundries (both with and without /3GB), and how to limit the Store Database cache size to make sure it stays within safe boundries. MSKB 328882 provides similar tips. It also explains out why memory limit tuning is needed in our case: Exchange calculates certain allocation sizes based on physical RAM, not address space. In REF5, in the comments, Larry Osterman states, in regards to Exchange and memory fragmentation, it starts showing up with several (3-5) thousand users. That gives us an idea of the scale we're talking about. MSKB 325044 and 317411 contain tons of detailed information on investigation of memory related issues, but little in the way of preventive advice. MSKB 313707 detail memory-related problems that can occur with Exchange, but do not apply to us for one reason or another. Most commonly, because we cannot use the /3GB switch on Win 2000 Srvr Std. However, these do serve to highlight that the /3GB switch is not a free lunch. MSKB 291988 notes that /3GB on Win 2000 Srvr Std doesn't really work, even if it looks like it is working. MSKB 266096 implies that the /3GB swith is required, period. Other sources, including MSKB articles, and REF4.1, contradict this. MSKB 266096 also states that it
RE: memory upgrade on EX2K3
Wow. Great post!!! -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 9:32 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. Here's my notes from when we upgraded to a new server, which had 4 GB RAM. At the time, we were running Windows 2000 Server Standard and Exchange 2000 Enterprise. As I recall, things weren't any different for Exchange 2003. Server 2003 supports the /4GB switch even for Standard, so that may make a difference. Summary --- New server has: - 4 GB of RAM - Windows 2000 Server Standard - Exchange 2000 Enterprise - Active Directory Domain Controller and Global Catalog - Several other applications Should we use the /3GB switch in the BOOT.INI file on server? Short answer: No Quick Background i386 = 32-bit 32-bit = 4 GB By default, Windows on i386 splits the virtual address space into 2 GB for userland and 2 GB for the kernel. The /3GB switch changes this to give 3 GB to userland and 1 GB to the kernel. This means processes can have a larger virtual address space, at the cost of cutting kernel virtual address space in half. Reducing the kernel address space is not without penalties. Quick Explanation - 1. On a system doing many different things, there is little to no benefit in depriving the kernel of address space it could use for caching in RAM. 1a. Exchange generally only benefits from the extra address space on a dedicated Exchange box. Less kernel memory is needed since the only thing the box is doing is running Exchange, not managing many different things. 2. The /3GB switch is not supported on Win 2000 Srvr Std. It is supported on Win 2003 Srvr and Win 2000 Srvr Enterprise, but we don't have those. 2a. It isn't worth upgrading to Win 2000 Srvr Ent because of Point 1, above. Notes - 4GT = 4 gigabyte tuning. The /3GB switch turns this on. Virtual address space (the memory a process can address) is not the same as the physical address space (the amount of RAM the machine can address). With /3GB enabled, a program still has to request the larger memory space, or it will still be limited to 2 GB. This is a backwards compatabiltiy hack to let programs which assume a 2 GB userland keep working. This has nothing to do with PAE (physical address extension). PAE changes the 32-bit physical address space to a 36-bit physical address space. It lets the machine address more RAM. The amount of RAM the machine can address has nothing to do with the address space of a running process. This has nothing to do with page files (swap files), which are sometimes called Virtual Memory. That kind of virtual memory has nothing to do with virtual addres space (which is also sometimes called virtual memory). Detailed Analysis - REF1 states that If you're working with Exchange Server and another application that doesn't know about large memory spaces, that other program will not be able to use any of the additional memory provided by /3GB. In particular, Exchange plus an AD DC means one should not use /3GB switch. REF2 enforces this, in particular pointing out things like antivirus software and database servers, which also tend to be memory hungry. REF2 also provides some very useful looking pointers to info on how to tune Windows and Exchange for more balanced memory operation. REF3 further enforces the kernel/userland tradeoffs, noting that It is possible to run out of kernel memory well before running out of user memory, or vice versa. MSKB 315407 provides a registry hack that tweaks the OS memory manager in a way that helps reduced memory fragmentation with large RAMs. MSKB 266768 tells how to monitor the Exchange IS to make sure memory allocations are within safe boundries (both with and without /3GB), and how to limit the Store Database cache size to make sure it stays within safe boundries. MSKB 328882 provides similar tips. It also explains out why memory limit tuning is needed in our case: Exchange calculates certain allocation sizes based on physical RAM, not address space. In REF5, in the comments, Larry Osterman states, in regards to Exchange and memory fragmentation, it starts showing up with several (3-5) thousand users. That gives us an idea of the scale we're talking about. MSKB 325044 and 317411 contain tons of detailed information on investigation of memory related issues, but little in the way of preventive advice. MSKB 313707 detail memory-related problems that can occur with Exchange, but do not apply to us for one reason or another. Most commonly, because we cannot use the /3GB switch on Win 2000 Srvr Std. However, these do serve to highlight that the /3GB switch is not a free lunch. MSKB 291988 notes that /3GB on Win 2000 Srvr Std doesn't really work, even
Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3
Very informative post, but I didn't catch the part where the OP stated his Exchange server was also a DC. - Sean On 5/27/08, David Mazzaccaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow. Great post!!! -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 9:32 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. Here's my notes from when we upgraded to a new server, which had 4 GB RAM. At the time, we were running Windows 2000 Server Standard and Exchange 2000 Enterprise. As I recall, things weren't any different for Exchange 2003. Server 2003 supports the /4GB switch even for Standard, so that may make a difference. Summary --- New server has: - 4 GB of RAM - Windows 2000 Server Standard - Exchange 2000 Enterprise - Active Directory Domain Controller and Global Catalog - Several other applications Should we use the /3GB switch in the BOOT.INI file on server? Short answer: No Quick Background i386 = 32-bit 32-bit = 4 GB By default, Windows on i386 splits the virtual address space into 2 GB for userland and 2 GB for the kernel. The /3GB switch changes this to give 3 GB to userland and 1 GB to the kernel. This means processes can have a larger virtual address space, at the cost of cutting kernel virtual address space in half. Reducing the kernel address space is not without penalties. Quick Explanation - 1. On a system doing many different things, there is little to no benefit in depriving the kernel of address space it could use for caching in RAM. 1a. Exchange generally only benefits from the extra address space on a dedicated Exchange box. Less kernel memory is needed since the only thing the box is doing is running Exchange, not managing many different things. 2. The /3GB switch is not supported on Win 2000 Srvr Std. It is supported on Win 2003 Srvr and Win 2000 Srvr Enterprise, but we don't have those. 2a. It isn't worth upgrading to Win 2000 Srvr Ent because of Point 1, above. Notes - 4GT = 4 gigabyte tuning. The /3GB switch turns this on. Virtual address space (the memory a process can address) is not the same as the physical address space (the amount of RAM the machine can address). With /3GB enabled, a program still has to request the larger memory space, or it will still be limited to 2 GB. This is a backwards compatabiltiy hack to let programs which assume a 2 GB userland keep working. This has nothing to do with PAE (physical address extension). PAE changes the 32-bit physical address space to a 36-bit physical address space. It lets the machine address more RAM. The amount of RAM the machine can address has nothing to do with the address space of a running process. This has nothing to do with page files (swap files), which are sometimes called Virtual Memory. That kind of virtual memory has nothing to do with virtual addres space (which is also sometimes called virtual memory). Detailed Analysis - REF1 states that If you're working with Exchange Server and another application that doesn't know about large memory spaces, that other program will not be able to use any of the additional memory provided by /3GB. In particular, Exchange plus an AD DC means one should not use /3GB switch. REF2 enforces this, in particular pointing out things like antivirus software and database servers, which also tend to be memory hungry. REF2 also provides some very useful looking pointers to info on how to tune Windows and Exchange for more balanced memory operation. REF3 further enforces the kernel/userland tradeoffs, noting that It is possible to run out of kernel memory well before running out of user memory, or vice versa. MSKB 315407 provides a registry hack that tweaks the OS memory manager in a way that helps reduced memory fragmentation with large RAMs. MSKB 266768 tells how to monitor the Exchange IS to make sure memory allocations are within safe boundries (both with and without /3GB), and how to limit the Store Database cache size to make sure it stays within safe boundries. MSKB 328882 provides similar tips. It also explains out why memory limit tuning is needed in our case: Exchange calculates certain allocation sizes based on physical RAM, not address space. In REF5, in the comments, Larry Osterman states, in regards to Exchange and memory fragmentation, it starts showing up with several (3-5) thousand users. That gives us an idea of the scale we're talking about. MSKB 325044 and 317411 contain tons of detailed information on investigation of memory related issues, but little in the way of preventive advice. MSKB 313707 detail memory-related problems that can occur with Exchange, but do not apply
Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Sean Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Very informative post, but I didn't catch the part where the OP stated his Exchange server was also a DC. I didn't mean to imply that our situation was identical to his. Those were notes, not advice. :) -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: memory upgrade on EX2K3
So, I performed the upgrade and there was no issues, Sean, thanks for the information on the regedit. I also ran the Exchange BPA and there where no issues, (minors no majors) with the upgrade. Also, this server is a member not a DC, this is a single exchange with no front or backend config. Thanks everyone for your informative information. Cheers, Thomas From: Sean Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:08 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 Very informative post, but I didn't catch the part where the OP stated his Exchange server was also a DC. - Sean On 5/27/08, David Mazzaccaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow. Great post!!! -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 9:32 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. Here's my notes from when we upgraded to a new server, which had 4 GB RAM. At the time, we were running Windows 2000 Server Standard and Exchange 2000 Enterprise. As I recall, things weren't any different for Exchange 2003. Server 2003 supports the /4GB switch even for Standard, so that may make a difference. Summary --- New server has: - 4 GB of RAM - Windows 2000 Server Standard - Exchange 2000 Enterprise - Active Directory Domain Controller and Global Catalog - Several other applications Should we use the /3GB switch in the BOOT.INI file on server? Short answer: No Quick Background i386 = 32-bit 32-bit = 4 GB By default, Windows on i386 splits the virtual address space into 2 GB for userland and 2 GB for the kernel. The /3GB switch changes this to give 3 GB to userland and 1 GB to the kernel. This means processes can have a larger virtual address space, at the cost of cutting kernel virtual address space in half. Reducing the kernel address space is not without penalties. Quick Explanation - 1. On a system doing many different things, there is little to no benefit in depriving the kernel of address space it could use for caching in RAM. 1a. Exchange generally only benefits from the extra address space on a dedicated Exchange box. Less kernel memory is needed since the only thing the box is doing is running Exchange, not managing many different things. 2. The /3GB switch is not supported on Win 2000 Srvr Std. It is supported on Win 2003 Srvr and Win 2000 Srvr Enterprise, but we don't have those. 2a. It isn't worth upgrading to Win 2000 Srvr Ent because of Point 1, above. Notes - 4GT = 4 gigabyte tuning. The /3GB switch turns this on. Virtual address space (the memory a process can address) is not the same as the physical address space (the amount of RAM the machine can address). With /3GB enabled, a program still has to request the larger memory space, or it will still be limited to 2 GB. This is a backwards compatabiltiy hack to let programs which assume a 2 GB userland keep working. This has nothing to do with PAE (physical address extension). PAE changes the 32-bit physical address space to a 36-bit physical address space. It lets the machine address more RAM. The amount of RAM the machine can address has nothing to do with the address space of a running process. This has nothing to do with page files (swap files), which are sometimes called Virtual Memory. That kind of virtual memory has nothing to do with virtual addres space (which is also sometimes called virtual memory). Detailed Analysis - REF1 states that If you're working with Exchange Server and another application that doesn't know about large memory spaces, that other program will not be able to use any of the additional memory provided by /3GB. In particular, Exchange plus an AD DC means one should not use /3GB switch. REF2 enforces this, in particular pointing out things like antivirus software and database servers, which also tend to be memory hungry. REF2 also provides some very useful looking pointers to info on how to tune Windows and Exchange for more balanced memory operation. REF3 further enforces the kernel/userland tradeoffs, noting that It is possible to run out of kernel memory well before running out of user memory, or vice versa. MSKB 315407 provides a registry hack that tweaks the OS memory manager in a way that helps reduced memory fragmentation with large RAMs. MSKB 266768 tells how to monitor the Exchange IS to make sure memory allocations are within safe boundries (both with and without /3GB), and how to limit the Store Database cache size to make sure it stays within safe boundries. MSKB 328882 provides similar tips. It also explains out why memory limit tuning is needed in our case: Exchange calculates certain allocation sizes based on physical RAM, not address space. In REF5
RE: memory upgrade on EX2K3
He did actually infer it, the second paragraph: On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sean, that was another article I was reading as well. So I jumped ahead to fast and after reading a few other docs; correct me if I am wrong. But the /userva switch, should I monitor the memory performance after implementing the /3GB and then determine if the PTEs drop then implement? The reason I ask this (may sound dumb) but our EX2K3 is our only server and everything is hosted on it, priv and pub. Our organization is limited on funds and cannot follow MS' best practices. TIA Thomas M -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 8:27 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Sean Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Very informative post, but I didn't catch the part where the OP stated his Exchange server was also a DC. I didn't mean to imply that our situation was identical to his. Those were notes, not advice. :) -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: memory upgrade on EX2K3
Thomas, You said this is your only server. DC as well. We tried this on a DC and it came crashing down around us. Didn't take long, about 15 minutes after being up it just crashed. When looking around I believe it was said not to do this if the Exchange Server was also a DC. It was several years ago, so the details are fuzzy. We rebooted, changed the registry entries back and cycled again, all was well. I tried it again and made sure I did the numbers properly and had the same result. Greg -Original Message- From: Steven Peck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 5:38 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 And sometimes you have to go down from 3030 to 2800 or 2900 depending on your setup and the memory used. Check out the best practices analyzer for more info Steven Peck http:www.blkmtn.org On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did read that earlier and I just finished printing all the documents out for some bedtime reading. I'm off for the day, you all have a good 3 day weekend. Thomas From: Sean Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 12:45 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 I'm no expert by any means, but based on the article, if you're running Exchange 2003 on any version of Windows 2003 and have more than 1GB physical memory installed, then Microsoft recommends setting the /3GB and /USERVA switches. (specifically, /3GB /USERVA=3030). This simply enables more PTEs on the server. Make sure to read through the rest of the article because it's equally important to set the HeapDeCommitFreeBlockThreshold registry value. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager Value name: HeapDeCommitFreeBlockThreshold Value type: REG_DWORD Value data: 0x0004 (recommended) Value default: not present In addition, if you're supporting more than 500 mailboxes on your server, you'll want to configure the msExchESEParamLogBuffers attribute in AD using ADSIEdit. 1) Open the Configuration Container. 2) Navigate to CN=Services, CN=Microsoft Exchange, CN=Your Organization Name 3) Expand CN=Administrative Groups, CN=Administrative Group Name, CN=Servers 4) Expand CN=Your Server Name, CN=Information Store 5) Right click on CN=your storage group and select properties. (If you have multiple storage groups, you'll want to perform the following steps for both) 6) find the msExchESEParamLogBuffers attribute and change the value to 9000. - Sean On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sean, that was another article I was reading as well. So I jumped ahead to fast and after reading a few other docs; correct me if I am wrong. But the /userva switch, should I monitor the memory performance after implementing the /3GB and then determine if the PTEs drop then implement? The reason I ask this (may sound dumb) but our EX2K3 is our only server and everything is hosted on it, priv and pub. Our organization is limited on funds and cannot follow MS' best practices. TIA Thomas From: Sean Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 11:57 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 I found this article to be helpful: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=815372 - Sean On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. I've been reading the documents on utilizing the /3GB switch. However, when reading 325044, there is a /userva in the doc. But I read 316739 which explains how to use the /userva and I'm a little confused as to why you would use that switch. Could some clarify for me as to why the /userva would benefit or would not? TIA Thomas Gonzalez Technology Manager Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas 210.349.2404 phone 210.403.1586 DID 210.349.2666 fax www.girlscouts-swtx.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas
Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3
I found this article to be helpful: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=815372 - Sean On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. I've been reading the documents on utilizing the /3GB switch. However, when reading 325044, there is a /userva in the doc. But I read 316739 which explains how to use the /userva and I'm a little confused as to why you would use that switch. Could some clarify for me as to why the /userva would benefit or would not? TIA Thomas Gonzalez Technology Manager Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas 210.349.2404 phone 210.403.1586 DID 210.349.2666 fax www.girlscouts-swtx.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: memory upgrade on EX2K3
Sean, that was another article I was reading as well. So I jumped ahead to fast and after reading a few other docs; correct me if I am wrong. But the /userva switch, should I monitor the memory performance after implementing the /3GB and then determine if the PTEs drop then implement? The reason I ask this (may sound dumb) but our EX2K3 is our only server and everything is hosted on it, priv and pub. Our organization is limited on funds and cannot follow MS' best practices. TIA Thomas From: Sean Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 11:57 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 I found this article to be helpful: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=815372 - Sean On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. I've been reading the documents on utilizing the /3GB switch. However, when reading 325044, there is a /userva in the doc. But I read 316739 which explains how to use the /userva and I'm a little confused as to why you would use that switch. Could some clarify for me as to why the /userva would benefit or would not? TIA Thomas Gonzalez Technology Manager Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas 210.349.2404 phone 210.403.1586 DID 210.349.2666 fax www.girlscouts-swtx.org http://www.girlscouts-swtx.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: memory upgrade on EX2K3
ExBPA will tell you what do after you install the memory. From: Thomas Gonzalez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 10:07 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: memory upgrade on EX2K3 Sean, that was another article I was reading as well. So I jumped ahead to fast and after reading a few other docs; correct me if I am wrong. But the /userva switch, should I monitor the memory performance after implementing the /3GB and then determine if the PTEs drop then implement? The reason I ask this (may sound dumb) but our EX2K3 is our only server and everything is hosted on it, priv and pub. Our organization is limited on funds and cannot follow MS' best practices. TIA Thomas From: Sean Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 11:57 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 I found this article to be helpful: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=815372 - Sean On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. I've been reading the documents on utilizing the /3GB switch. However, when reading 325044, there is a /userva in the doc. But I read 316739 which explains how to use the /userva and I'm a little confused as to why you would use that switch. Could some clarify for me as to why the /userva would benefit or would not? TIA Thomas Gonzalez Technology Manager Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas 210.349.2404 phone 210.403.1586 DID 210.349.2666 fax www.girlscouts-swtx.org http://www.girlscouts-swtx.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: memory upgrade on EX2K3
Thanks Martin, I'll run that after I install the memory tomorrow. Thomas From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 12:32 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: memory upgrade on EX2K3 ExBPA will tell you what do after you install the memory. From: Thomas Gonzalez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 10:07 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: memory upgrade on EX2K3 Sean, that was another article I was reading as well. So I jumped ahead to fast and after reading a few other docs; correct me if I am wrong. But the /userva switch, should I monitor the memory performance after implementing the /3GB and then determine if the PTEs drop then implement? The reason I ask this (may sound dumb) but our EX2K3 is our only server and everything is hosted on it, priv and pub. Our organization is limited on funds and cannot follow MS' best practices. TIA Thomas From: Sean Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 11:57 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 I found this article to be helpful: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=815372 - Sean On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. I've been reading the documents on utilizing the /3GB switch. However, when reading 325044, there is a /userva in the doc. But I read 316739 which explains how to use the /userva and I'm a little confused as to why you would use that switch. Could some clarify for me as to why the /userva would benefit or would not? TIA Thomas Gonzalez Technology Manager Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas 210.349.2404 phone 210.403.1586 DID 210.349.2666 fax www.girlscouts-swtx.org http://www.girlscouts-swtx.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3
I'm no expert by any means, but based on the article, if you're running Exchange 2003 on any version of Windows 2003 and have more than 1GB physical memory installed, then Microsoft recommends setting the /3GB and /USERVA switches. (specifically, /3GB /USERVA=3030). This simply enables more PTEs on the server. Make sure to read through the rest of the article because it's equally important to set the HeapDeCommitFreeBlockThreshold registry value. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager Value name: *HeapDeCommitFreeBlockThreshold* Value type: REG_DWORD Value data: *0x0004* (recommended) Value default: not present In addition, if you're supporting more than 500 mailboxes on your server, you'll want to configure the msExchESEParamLogBuffers attribute in AD using ADSIEdit. 1) Open the Configuration Container. 2) Navigate to CN=Services, CN=Microsoft Exchange, CN=Your Organization Name 3) Expand CN=Administrative Groups, CN=Administrative Group Name, CN=Servers 4) Expand CN=Your Server Name, CN=Information Store 5) Right click on CN=your storage group and select properties. (If you have multiple storage groups, you'll want to perform the following steps for both) 6) find the msExchESEParamLogBuffers attribute and change the value to 9000. - Sean On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sean, that was another article I was reading as well. So I jumped ahead to fast and after reading a few other docs; correct me if I am wrong. But the /userva switch, should I monitor the memory performance after implementing the /3GB and then determine if the PTEs drop then implement? The reason I ask this (may sound dumb) but our EX2K3 is our only server and everything is hosted on it, priv and pub. Our organization is limited on funds and cannot follow MS' best practices. TIA Thomas *From:* Sean Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *Sent:* Friday, May 23, 2008 11:57 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 I found this article to be helpful: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=815372 - Sean On 5/23/08, *Thomas Gonzalez* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. I've been reading the documents on utilizing the /3GB switch. However, when reading 325044, there is a /userva in the doc. But I read 316739 which explains how to use the /userva and I'm a little confused as to why you would use that switch. Could some clarify for me as to why the /userva would benefit or would not? TIA Thomas Gonzalez Technology Manager Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas 210.349.2404 phone 210.403.1586 DID 210.349.2666 fax www.girlscouts-swtx.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: memory upgrade on EX2K3
I did read that earlier and I just finished printing all the documents out for some bedtime reading. I'm off for the day, you all have a good 3 day weekend. Thomas From: Sean Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 12:45 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 I'm no expert by any means, but based on the article, if you're running Exchange 2003 on any version of Windows 2003 and have more than 1GB physical memory installed, then Microsoft recommends setting the /3GB and /USERVA switches. (specifically, /3GB /USERVA=3030). This simply enables more PTEs on the server. Make sure to read through the rest of the article because it's equally important to set the HeapDeCommitFreeBlockThreshold registry value. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager Value name: HeapDeCommitFreeBlockThreshold Value type: REG_DWORD Value data: 0x0004 (recommended) Value default: not present In addition, if you're supporting more than 500 mailboxes on your server, you'll want to configure the msExchESEParamLogBuffers attribute in AD using ADSIEdit. 1) Open the Configuration Container. 2) Navigate to CN=Services, CN=Microsoft Exchange, CN=Your Organization Name 3) Expand CN=Administrative Groups, CN=Administrative Group Name, CN=Servers 4) Expand CN=Your Server Name, CN=Information Store 5) Right click on CN=your storage group and select properties. (If you have multiple storage groups, you'll want to perform the following steps for both) 6) find the msExchESEParamLogBuffers attribute and change the value to 9000. - Sean On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sean, that was another article I was reading as well. So I jumped ahead to fast and after reading a few other docs; correct me if I am wrong. But the /userva switch, should I monitor the memory performance after implementing the /3GB and then determine if the PTEs drop then implement? The reason I ask this (may sound dumb) but our EX2K3 is our only server and everything is hosted on it, priv and pub. Our organization is limited on funds and cannot follow MS' best practices. TIA Thomas From: Sean Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 11:57 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 I found this article to be helpful: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=815372 - Sean On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. I've been reading the documents on utilizing the /3GB switch. However, when reading 325044, there is a /userva in the doc. But I read 316739 which explains how to use the /userva and I'm a little confused as to why you would use that switch. Could some clarify for me as to why the /userva would benefit or would not? TIA Thomas Gonzalez Technology Manager Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas 210.349.2404 phone 210.403.1586 DID 210.349.2666 fax www.girlscouts-swtx.org http://www.girlscouts-swtx.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3
And sometimes you have to go down from 3030 to 2800 or 2900 depending on your setup and the memory used. Check out the best practices analyzer for more info Steven Peck http:www.blkmtn.org On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did read that earlier and I just finished printing all the documents out for some bedtime reading. I'm off for the day, you all have a good 3 day weekend. Thomas From: Sean Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 12:45 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 I'm no expert by any means, but based on the article, if you're running Exchange 2003 on any version of Windows 2003 and have more than 1GB physical memory installed, then Microsoft recommends setting the /3GB and /USERVA switches. (specifically, /3GB /USERVA=3030). This simply enables more PTEs on the server. Make sure to read through the rest of the article because it's equally important to set the HeapDeCommitFreeBlockThreshold registry value. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager Value name: HeapDeCommitFreeBlockThreshold Value type: REG_DWORD Value data: 0x0004 (recommended) Value default: not present In addition, if you're supporting more than 500 mailboxes on your server, you'll want to configure the msExchESEParamLogBuffers attribute in AD using ADSIEdit. 1) Open the Configuration Container. 2) Navigate to CN=Services, CN=Microsoft Exchange, CN=Your Organization Name 3) Expand CN=Administrative Groups, CN=Administrative Group Name, CN=Servers 4) Expand CN=Your Server Name, CN=Information Store 5) Right click on CN=your storage group and select properties. (If you have multiple storage groups, you'll want to perform the following steps for both) 6) find the msExchESEParamLogBuffers attribute and change the value to 9000. - Sean On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sean, that was another article I was reading as well. So I jumped ahead to fast and after reading a few other docs; correct me if I am wrong. But the /userva switch, should I monitor the memory performance after implementing the /3GB and then determine if the PTEs drop then implement? The reason I ask this (may sound dumb) but our EX2K3 is our only server and everything is hosted on it, priv and pub. Our organization is limited on funds and cannot follow MS' best practices. TIA Thomas From: Sean Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 11:57 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: memory upgrade on EX2K3 I found this article to be helpful: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=815372 - Sean On 5/23/08, Thomas Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading our exchange 2003 memory from 2 gig to 4 gig this weekend. I've been reading the documents on utilizing the /3GB switch. However, when reading 325044, there is a /userva in the doc. But I read 316739 which explains how to use the /userva and I'm a little confused as to why you would use that switch. Could some clarify for me as to why the /userva would benefit or would not? TIA Thomas Gonzalez Technology Manager Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas 210.349.2404 phone 210.403.1586 DID 210.349.2666 fax www.girlscouts-swtx.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email
