Vail and Brekenridge (Storage Server 2008 r2) both have a single CPU and 8GB Ram limit. SBS 2011 Essentials (Aurora) allows 2 CPU's and 32GB Ram... Does anyone know of a way to remove the RAM/CPU limit of Vail or Brekenridge?
Limitations are stored inside one of system licenses (*.xrm-ms files, imported in tokens.dat). so one (kind of senseless though) ways would be to frankenbuild Vail into Aurora,(but why not to just install the last one instead then?). Other way would be to patch kernel file so that it'd bypass licenses' check and use all up to 128 GB of RAM and idk how many CPUs it natively can use... it should be similar to a known way of patching 32- bit kernel to allow 4+ GB of RAM in x86 Win7.... but it will cause all imaginable troubles with digital signature, security, kernel protection and so on... So the best option is just use Vail as it is meant to be used...
Fab answer -- thank you. Here's the conundrum. 1) My target machine happens to have Dual Processors and 16GB ram installed. It seems a real waste to leave 1/2 the processors and 1/2 the ram unused. 2) SBS Essentials 2011 (aurora) -- looks perfect as it supports 2 processors and up to 32GB ram as well as the bonus of up to 25 client computers. BUT : a) it must be a domain controller and my environment is not DC based. b) it doesn't support the media streaming and homegroup functionality of Vail. I tried installing and demoting it - but in doing so, the core dashboard functions and RDP got toasted...and I haven't figured out how to retrofit the streaming functions. So that takes me back to Vail being perfect except for: a) Processor Limit b) Memory Limit Any further thoughts? I have both so i don;t s'pose patching one with the other in some way, will get me there?
Me too. You are not alone in this request. Any chance someone got it to work by doing a frankenbuild? I have a dual-xeon 8GB server I am using for my WSSE 2008R2 but it is limited to 1CPU. I loaded it up with WHS2011 first then tried WSSE2008 and then SBSE 2011. WSSE2008R2 is the best fit for me feature-wise but the cpu limit is the only thing that doesn't fit my needs. If someone has a solution that works please reply.
Just throwing this out there, but why don't you chuck hyper-v core on there first and then run it in a vm? This would free up a cpu and 8GB for other VM's.