# Win2000 Server and RAM **Category:** [Yahoo Archive](https://www.epiusers.help/c/yahoo-archive/9) **Created:** 2001-05-04 09:14 UTC **Views:** 292 **Replies:** 3 **URL:** https://www.epiusers.help/t/win2000-server-and-ram/2805 --- ## Post #1 by @system
>[match.com Search FREE Profiles NOW!]
>
> Britt-
>
> I am interested in the testing process you undertook. What
> increment
> did you increase the buffers and what did you run for the test and how
> did
> you measure performance? I am in the process of spec-ing a new server
> for
> Vantage only use and have 1 GIG set aside for it. Would like to reduce
> the
> cost if I can. Thanks.
>
>
>
> _________________
> John Koppes
> Systems Coordinator
> PRECISION MACHINE AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY
> Address: PO Box 157
> Story City, Iowa 50248
> Phone: (515) 733-5181 Ext. 256
> Fax: (515) 733-4220
>
>
>
>
> >You tell progress how much memory to use in the number of buffers you
>
> >allocate.(-B)
> >Epicor told me that you just have to "try" different buffer sizes,
> and
> >check performance, since each server is different. Too much memory,
> can
> >cause the CPU to become over burdened and adversly affect
> performance.
> >Too little memory allocated will cause the buffers to be flushed too
> >often. In our case, more memory (we have 768 meg) would not do us
> any
> >good, since we are only using about 300meg for buffering. I did tests
>
> >with higher buffer settings, and performance went down.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> This document should only be read by those persons to whom it is
> addressed and is not intended to be relied upon by any person without
> subsequent written confirmation of its contents. Accordingly,
> PRECISION
> MACHINE AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY disclaims all responsibility and
> accepts
> no liability, including in negligence, for the consequences for any
> person
> acting, or refraining from acting, on such information prior to the
> receipt
> by those persons of subsequent written confirmation.
>
> If you have received this E-mail / Fax message in error, please
> notify
> PRECISION MACHINE AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY immediately by telephone.
> Please also destroy and delete the message.
>
> Contact:
> By Phone: Systems Administrator at (515)-733-5181
> By Email: sysadmin@...
>
> Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure,
> modification, distribution and/or publication of this E-mail / Fax
> message
> is strictly prohibited.
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>--
> To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
> Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/. Note: You must have
> already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access.
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> Does anyone have information regarding how Win2000 server addresses[Lose 20 lbs by July 9th!]
> the use
> of RAM. In particular with Progress/eMfg. We are buying a new server
> and how
> much RAM has become a topic of discussion. Our prior servers had 1 GB
> of RAM
> and I don't want to buy more than that if the OS will not use it to
> it's
> advantage.
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>--
> To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
> Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/. Note: You must have
> already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access.
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>You tell progress how much memory to use in the number of buffers you______________________________________________________________________
>allocate.(-B)
>Epicor told me that you just have to "try" different buffer sizes, and
>check performance, since each server is different. Too much memory, can
>cause the CPU to become over burdened and adversly affect performance.
>Too little memory allocated will cause the buffers to be flushed too
>often. In our case, more memory (we have 768 meg) would not do us any
>good, since we are only using about 300meg for buffering. I did tests
>with higher buffer settings, and performance went down.