Re: Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- From: Jeff Pitsch <Jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 09:37:58 -0400
eh I'm just going by my experience. I've not had a problem with pagefiles at 4gb while the system has more memory. Microsoft also used to give everyone full control rights to system directories and left everything wide open by default, I never followed that and always locked things down. It's entirely up to you.
I dont' remember, did you say whether the /pae switch was enabled in the boot.ini file?
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Citrix Technology Professional
Provision Networks VIP
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
Jerry Alan Braga wrote:
but microsoft always recommends 1.5x the size of your physical memory for the page file. I understand the more page file the more disk is involved and the disk is the slowest but what if you run over your memory you need to store that somewhere..
If I make the page file 4096 will I not run out of memory and force a possible crash of the server. What about the issue of not being able to address all my 9gb of memory.
Windows sees it via MyComputer->Properties but as a whole performance monitor does not see it with all my processes running.
"Jeff Pitsch" <Jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:O8g6X1mlHHA.492@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSee inline:
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Citrix Technology Professional
Provision Networks VIP
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
Jerry Alan Braga wrote:but windows recommended a 13gb page file, so we set it to none, reboot in safe mode, defrag entire drive than added page file fixed at recommended size.So? Just because the OS recommends it doesn't make it a best practice. Too much pagefile can have a huge detrimental affect on the performance of the system. Think about it, that's 13gb of information it could potentially be accessing from the ahrd drive. What is the slowest part of any system? The hard drive. Again, 4gb tops.
so are you saying that we are actually using all of our 9gb of memory and that our applications are actually addressing it because the task manager performance tab never ever cracks 4gb of memory usage. What is the best way to monitor this stuff as I have seen thru the task manager performance tab our dl380 dual core 2 cpu G3 server hit 100% cpu for 10 seconds or more at a time.Unless you have enabled the /PAE switch then Windows will only address 4gb. Use performance monitor to monitor memory, cpu, etc. Just because cpu is maxed doesn't mean cpu is the problem. It very well could be that your pagefile is causing a lot of faults because of it's size requiring attention from the cpu.
we are also running into "the system has reached the maximum size allowed for the system part of the registry. Additional storage requests will be ignored." I thought that xp, and 2003 did not have a limit, what could this be as this message is never logged in the event view just on the console itself.
we also run into userenv errors 1508 SYSTEM
---------
Windows was unable to load the registry. This is often caused by insufficient memory or insufficient security rights.
DETAIL - Insufficient system resources exist to complete the requested service. for C:\Documents and Settings\jacquieb\ntuser.dat
For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.
followed by event 1500 "actual user"
--------
Windows cannot log you on because your profile cannot be loaded. Check that you are connected to the network, or that your network is functioning correctly. If this problem persists, contact your network administrator.
DETAIL - Insufficient system resources exist to complete the requested service.
I am not sure what these are but I wonder if there are all related somehow ?
"Jeff Pitsch" <Jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:em3MdQmlHHA.4960@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx1) A 32-bit system cannot use more than 4gb of memory without PAE. PAE is ok but it will cut down on your kernel memory because it requires more PTE's to handle the extra addressing. Never EVER use the /3gb switch on a terminal server. Before any of this though, I would go ahead and do some real performance monitoring with something other than task manager. Your problem may not be memory but the fact that you have a 13gb page file. You really shouldn't have anymore than 4gb tops.
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Citrix Technology Professional
Provision Networks VIP
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
Jerry Alan Braga wrote:We currently are running 2 win2003 EE sp2 terminal servers in an active directory domain that get their romaing profiles for the TS users from the DC. We are now running into performance issues (cpu/memory) as it seems from the task manager performance monitor that we cannot use more than 3.9gb of memory even though we have 9gb installed and have a 13gb page file (suggested by windows) and have the /pae switch enabled in the boot.ini without the /3gb switch.
My question is that does not the /pae along with win2003 EE give the ability of using up 16gb like it says for our applications. Our applications are 32bit based an I know about the 32bit limit of memory addressing but is that not what the /pae and win2003 EE supposed to address. Or does 64bit win2003 EE actually give you that through the WOW emulator to 32bit applications.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- From: Jerry Alan Braga
- Re: Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- From: Jerry Alan Braga
- Re: Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- References:
- Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- From: Jerry Alan Braga
- Re: Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- From: Jeff Pitsch
- Re: Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- From: Jerry Alan Braga
- Re: Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- From: Jeff Pitsch
- Re: Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- From: Jerry Alan Braga
- Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- Prev by Date: Re: changes not saving
- Next by Date: Re: changes not saving
- Previous by thread: Re: Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- Next by thread: Re: Terminal Server 32bit /PAE vs 64bit
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|