Windows Server 2016 essentials uses only 64 GB even if it sees the whole 128 GB installed
772
A client has Windows Server 2016 Essentials.
He installed 128 GB RAM in his server.
But Windows reports that it uses only 64 GB even if it sees the whole 128 GB installed
Why? What can be done to use the whole RAM available?
The best use of that RAM would be to install a hypervisor (for example, Proxmox, ESXi free edition, or Xen) and run a 64 GB VM with this Windows license, and additional VMs (with either open source operating systems, or other Windows licenses) on the computer. These could, for example, do useful work as a web server, firewall, backup staging server, etc.
You dodged one bullet here—later versions of Windows Server Essentials also incur a limit on number of cores, whereas Windows Server 2016 is only processor-limited to two physical sockets, with any number of cores on those CPUs.
Simply upgrading this host to a later release of Essentials could constrain you in new ways.
Answer: Your best option is to go to a currently supported OS, and the "standard" version of Windows Server, like Windows Server 2022, which is more expensive than Essentials.
Your customer probably dropped 5 digits of cash on the new hardware, but reused an old license for Windows. Sadly, the software needs a similar increase in spend.
If the host runs acceptably as is, you could take out half the memory and use it in a different host.
Or you could install a virtualisation solution, run Windows essentials with 64 GB allocated, and leave another approximately 60 GB for other virtual machines. However that's putting a lot of eggs in one basket. The plan needs to explore risk, backups, failure scenarios, etc.
The Essentials license limits it to 64 GB. To use the rest of the RAM you need a higher license.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server-essentials/get-started/hardware-limits
The best use of that RAM would be to install a hypervisor (for example, Proxmox, ESXi free edition, or Xen) and run a 64 GB VM with this Windows license, and additional VMs (with either open source operating systems, or other Windows licenses) on the computer. These could, for example, do useful work as a web server, firewall, backup staging server, etc.
You dodged one bullet here—later versions of Windows Server Essentials also incur a limit on number of cores, whereas Windows Server 2016 is only processor-limited to two physical sockets, with any number of cores on those CPUs.
Simply upgrading this host to a later release of Essentials could constrain you in new ways.
Answer: Your best option is to go to a currently supported OS, and the "standard" version of Windows Server, like Windows Server 2022, which is more expensive than Essentials.
Your customer probably dropped 5 digits of cash on the new hardware, but reused an old license for Windows. Sadly, the software needs a similar increase in spend.
If the host runs acceptably as is, you could take out half the memory and use it in a different host.
Or you could install a virtualisation solution, run Windows essentials with 64 GB allocated, and leave another approximately 60 GB for other virtual machines. However that's putting a lot of eggs in one basket. The plan needs to explore risk, backups, failure scenarios, etc.
Good luck!