Re: Virtual Server and SBS
- From: "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 15:39:57 -0700
Simply not true in a test environment. I ran a LOT of SBS in virtual machines during the writing of my R2 book, and I never gave the OS more than 1 GB. I frankly didn't need to in order to have acceptible performance. I'm not suggesting you should run a 25 user production environment on 1GB, but a test environment? Perfectly adequate.
--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64
"Leythos" <void@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:JpxXg.10468$OE1.4424@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <FA585B61-FDFC-4DA6-A9FB-5CCDBDBC723F@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
charlie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
SBS does well in 1Gb.
SBS does NOT do well in 1GB RAM, it will be into the swap file in short
order and it will be very slow to respond. A typical SBS Standard
solution works WELL with 2 GB of RAM and is very happy with 2.5GB. A
typical SBS Premium solutions works WELL with 3GB RAM and is very happy
with 3.5GB.
--
spam999free@xxxxxxxxxx
remove 999 in order to email me
.
- References:
- Virtual Server and SBS
- From: coyoteservices
- Re: Virtual Server and SBS
- From: Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]
- Re: Virtual Server and SBS
- From: coyoteservices
- Re: Virtual Server and SBS
- From: Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]
- Re: Virtual Server and SBS
- From: coyoteservices
- Re: Virtual Server and SBS
- From: Charlie Russel - MVP
- Virtual Server and SBS
- Prev by Date: Scheduled Jobs in NT Backup not starting
- Next by Date: Re: Virtual Server and SBS
- Previous by thread: Re: Virtual Server and SBS
- Next by thread: Re: Virtual Server and SBS
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|