Memory Limitations of 32bit vs 64bit 3

[1DMF]

Hi,

Please can someone confirm if the 32bit version of SBS2K8 is still limited to only handling 4GB of memory.

This is what my reseller has indicated, which means it's as limited as SBS2003 and kinda makes the upgrade pointless.

Yet the 64bit version seems to be able to handle 192GB, however, we have software that might not be able to run on 64bit.

Is there really this massive limitation with the 32bit version of SBS?

Thanks,

1DMF

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you."

"If a shortcut was meant to be easy, it wouldn't be a shortcut, it would be the way!"

Google Rank Extractor -> Perl beta with FusionCharts

 

[1DMF]

I appreciate that in a perfect world I'd have many servers..

AD/PDC
Exchange
SQL
File & Print
ISA

But as I'll be lucky to get two servers, hence going the SBS route, it's

1 box = AD/PDC/Exchange/File & Print
2 box = SQL

Still better than all on one box I guess!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you."

"If a shortcut was meant to be easy, it wouldn't be a shortcut, it would be the way!"

Google Rank Extractor -> Perl beta with FusionCharts

 

[PaulGillespie]

Yeah, that's fine but you won't have redundancy if you don't have AD/DNS on the second box.

Sounds like you'll be fine either way, so best of luck!

 

[1DMF]

but you won't have redundancy if you don't have AD/DNS on the second box

Why?

Won't SQL still be working, as its IP won't change it can be still be accessed can't it?

We have a dedicated web server co-hosted for us, that only has Window 2003 STD on it and SQL, it doesn't require AD or a PDC to be running?

I'm a little confused, the domain can go down internally , but SQL shouldn't be affected should it?

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you."

"If a shortcut was meant to be easy, it wouldn't be a shortcut, it would be the way!"

Google Rank Extractor -> Perl beta with FusionCharts

 

[PaulGillespie]

If your domain controller goes offline, what is going to provide authentication to the workstations while trying to access the SQL server?

Bluntly, the SQL server is a domain machine, anything which accesses it first of all have to be authenticated by AD. If AD is offline you could have problems trying to access it.

 

[1DMF]

If your domain controller goes offline, what is going to provide authentication to the workstations while trying to access the SQL server?Bluntly, the SQL server is a domain machine, anything which accesses it first of all have to be authenticated by AD. If AD is offline you could have problems trying to access it.

But we have SQL on a non-domain machine so that can't be the case.

We also don't use windows authentication, otherwise VPN remote users wouldn't be able to run the DB application.

Our DB connects direct to the SQL IP and uses password authentication!

So the domain can go down, but the DB will still run. Well that's how I see things working, but I'm open to suggestions.

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you."

"If a shortcut was meant to be easy, it wouldn't be a shortcut, it would be the way!"

Google Rank Extractor -> Perl beta with FusionCharts

 

[PaulGillespie]

Aw well, it sounds like you'll be fine then.

 

[terrywilson]

My two cents....

Sounds like you are using sql authentication for your app, if you are then you would be fine as the SQL server does the authentication rather than AD.

MS does not recommend SQL on a Domain Controller, the same was true in SBS 2003 but other than possible performance issues its the only definitive reason I have seen not to install to the main SBS08 box.

With the premium license (this is from accordo) you can use the Windows 2008 license soley for the purpose of virtualising your OS and the second server os provided that the virtual host is only used for management of the server (ie you can install Insite or Director, you cant install SQL or Trend Micro). Then you have two guests, one SBS and one 2008 running SQL. If you do this you need to have a minimum of 3 RAID 1 disks sets to get no drop in performance (plus a decent RAID controller). One mirror for each OS.

I have a couple sites with the above scenario and they run just as quick as split server boxes. Only reason we have deployed this way is for cost.

Don't install HyperV on the SBS 2008 box; it has the potential to break your networking as SBS cares about the order of network adaptors and HyperV will add extra ones.

 

[1DMF]

Thanks for the input Terry.

I've decided to go for two boxes rather than virtualisation.

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you."

"If a shortcut was meant to be easy, it wouldn't be a shortcut, it would be the way!"

Google Rank Extractor -> Perl beta with FusionCharts