ASP Developer Network - Brought to you by Steve Radich and BitShop, Inc. - http://www.bitshop.com

ASPDeveloper

ASPDeveloper.Net / VirtualServerFAQ.COM

Make sure you go to our home page for:

* Virtual Server 2005 FAQ
* ASP.Net 2.0 Information
* ASP.Net 2.0 Streaming Tutorials
* ASP.Net 2.0 HTML based Tutorials

Made possible by Business Internet Technology Shop (BitShop)

Virtual Server 2005

Recent Virtual Server 2005 posts

* create VM from a captured windows server
* More than one SSL Cert for VMRC?
* moving a vhd from one VS to another
* vSMP expected in a future release?
* Browse virutal discs in VHD files when the VHD isn"t running.
* Moving online servers to VS lab environment
* VS and RAID - Won"t work
* Fragmentation on VS host is high
* No Audio Device
* Microsoft anounces new virtualization friendly licensing
* 13.531 VM addtions before or after W2K3 SP1 Install?
* VM addition why so small?
* Does Virtual Server disable standby on the host OS?
* static ip address or dhcp?
* VS Responsiveness
* VS Additions
* Implemenation of Virtual Server
* Machine shuts down before VS completes saving of VM state
* not enough physical memory or system resources available
* Quick network configuration of VMs

Add Solution

Host Memory and OS

Source: microsoft.public.virtualserver
Sent: 10/12/2005
From: Nordic <(email address - cut out)>
Message:

Hello:

I am running Windows XP Pro SP2 as the host OS for Virtual Server 2005. It
is a sandbox only, not production. I just maxed my machine's RAM with 4GB.
The host OS only report 3GB, though all 4GB show up in the BIOS. Google
searches give me somewhat conflicting info about 4GB in XP. Some say the
additional 1GB is used but not reported in the OS. Some say it is not used
at all. Can someone clarify this for me?

Is it worth simply upgrading the host OS to Windows Server 2003?

Thank you.

Post Reply | This is Spam! | Mark as Spam

Related Messages

RE: Host Memory and OS

Sent: 10/13/2005
From: Joe from WI
Message:

I feel your pain.

In the 32-bit world, there is a maximum number of physical address numbers
(4GB). Some devices in your computer require a physical address to operate
such as HDD controllers, etc. You cannot have the same address on two
different things. Whatever address numbers that are not in use are assigned
to memory.

That's why the BIOS sees all 4GB but Windows only reports between 3 and 3.5GB.

You might free up more addresses by disabling all unnecessary motherboard
devices that you don't use (Firewire, USB, controllers, etc.).

Some motherboards have a BIOS switch that remaps the unused memory to above
4GB. So the physical address range for memory becomes 0-3GB and then 4-5GB.
Windows reports 4GB of memory using a technology called PAE (physical address
extensions) which provides a technique to work with address numbers beyond
it's normal limit of 4GB..

In order to do this, you need an operating system that supports PAE in order
to access memory locations above the 4GB mark. That is because the address
becomes so big that normal Windows cannot keep track of it. I use Win Server
2003 EE which supports that. I don't know if Win XP Pro SP2 does or not.

There is some useful information in the knowledgebase about PAE. And, it
carrys some warnings such as device drives that you are using must also
support PAE because if they happen to need to access a memory location above
the 4GB mark, it will probably crash the computer or corrupt data if its not
designed to handle the large address numbers.

Hope that helps,
Joe

"Nordic" wrote:

Show quoted text

> Hello:
>
> I am running Windows XP Pro SP2 as the host OS for Virtual Server 2005. It
> is a sandbox only, not production. I just maxed my machine's RAM with 4GB.
> The host OS only report 3GB, though all 4GB show up in the BIOS. Google
> searches give me somewhat conflicting info about 4GB in XP. Some say the
> additional 1GB is used but not reported in the OS. Some say it is not used
> at all. Can someone clarify this for me?
>
> Is it worth simply upgrading the host OS to Windows Server 2003?
>
> Thank you.
>

RE: memory addresses assigned to bios to be accessed by the cpu

Sent: 10/22/2005
From: smooth operator
Message:

Could anyone tell me other than RAM wand needs memory address assigned to the
BIOS in order to be accessed by the CPU.

Thanks in advance
--
Pam

"Nordic" wrote:

Show quoted text

RE: memory addresses assigned to bios to be accessed by the cpu

Sent: 10/22/2005
From: Paul Adare <(email address - cut out)>
Message:

In article <(email address - cut out)>, in the
microsoft.public.virtualserver news group, =?Utf-8?B?
c21vb3RoIG9wZXJhdG9y?= <(email address - cut out)>
says...

I don't understand your question.

--
Paul Adare
MVP - Windows - Virtual Machine
http://www.identit.ca/blogs/paul/
"The English language, complete with irony, satire, and sarcasm, has
survived for centuries without smileys. Only the new crop of modern
computer geeks finds it impossible to detect a joke that is not clearly
labeled as such."
Ray Shea

Show quoted text

> Could anyone tell me other than RAM wand needs memory address assigned to the
> BIOS in order to be accessed by the CPU.
>

RE: memory addresses assigned to bios to be accessed by the cpu

Sent: 10/24/2005
From: Joe from WI
Message:

All devices whether intgrated into the motherboard or plugged into an
expansion slot (PCI, etc.) require an address in order to be used by the
computer.

If you're looking to minimize address and/or system resource consumption, go
through the BIOS and turn off (disable) any device that you are not using.
Extra USB ports (How many of us really need 8 USB ports?), extra
LAN/NIC/Ethernet, Firewire, extra IDE controllers, extra SATA controllers,
RAID, Game ports, MIDI ports, COM/Serial, Parallel port, etc.

It's hard to give specific information because every motherboard and BIOS
are different. And in my experience, most motherboards have everything or
almost everything turned on by default.

After you do this, look for a BIOS option that clears Plug and Play
information. That will force the BIOS to reassign resouces when you restart.
Hopefully, freeing up some system resources.

Is this what you were looking for?

"smooth operator" wrote:

Show quoted text

> Could anyone tell me other than RAM wand needs memory address assigned to the
> BIOS in order to be accessed by the CPU.
>
> Thanks in advance
> --
> Pam
>
>
> "Nordic" wrote:
>
> > Hello:
> >
> > I am running Windows XP Pro SP2 as the host OS for Virtual Server 2005. It
> > is a sandbox only, not production. I just maxed my machine's RAM with 4GB.
> > The host OS only report 3GB, though all 4GB show up in the BIOS. Google
> > searches give me somewhat conflicting info about 4GB in XP. Some say the
> > additional 1GB is used but not reported in the OS. Some say it is not used
> > at all. Can someone clarify this for me?
> >
> > Is it worth simply upgrading the host OS to Windows Server 2003?
> >
> > Thank you.
> >

Post Reply | This is Spam! | Mark as Spam

Other groups

Virtual PC (Mac)(3592)	Virtual PC(12844)	Virtual PC (French)(496)
Virtual Server 2005(6245)

Our Sponsors

Virtual Server 2005 Info Here!
http://www.aspdeveloper.net

Wiki

Blogs

Articles

Image galleries

File galleries

Forums

Maps

Directories

ASP Developer Network (since 1996) - Brought to you by Steve Radich and BitShop, Inc. - http://www.bitshop.com
Copyright © 1997-2005 by BitShop, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
No content may be reproduced in any form without written permission from BitShop, Inc.
We will be honored to assist with reproduction rights on our material if you contact us.
We also can provide print articles for your magazine, private training seminars at your site, and conference presentations.
Thank you for visiting. Please bookmark our site if you found it useful!
If you wish to make a donation it will help further the development of these free resources: