What I meant was that they are already trimmed down. From my experience, it is more likely that you have too little on a server OS initially than too much. Also, like I said, I find it highly unlikely that Server 08 has a higher footprint than Server 03.
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 9:32 PM, J T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Server OSes are really not designed to be trimmed down? > > You would expect a server OS to have a light memory and cpu footprint, > giving more resources to the applications it will be running. > > On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You are misinformed. Windows 2008 offers no drawbacks compared to 2003. > > Microsoft did not give server 2008 the Vista treatment in terms of > resource > > usage. Server OSes are really not designed to be trimmed down, unless > you > > are interested in running Server 2008 Core, which might be a good option > as > > well. > > > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Midnight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I fail to see the problem. > > > > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > With these 4 servers running total Ram usage is at %64. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > > please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > > -- > --------- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
