RLUNT
asked on
WINSXS reduce size
There have been 4+ discussions on how to reduce the WINSXS folder size, but none of them actually provide a solution. Lots of discussion regarding that is 'should' stop growing at 15%, but no discussion on what if it does not stop growing. Lots of discussion on a sudo why to fool the system into thinking it is at a: when you moved it to b: - again, does not address the size issue. Lots of discussion on you should plan for XX amount of space for the OS per the specifications, but what they were and what they are now are radically different, so if you planned 80Gb for the OS and now that OS wants 120Gb due to the service packs, etc. you are out of luck expect for rebuilding your server. There is a lot of discussion about how this is a necessary folder. Ok, how do we manage it?
So the question is does anyone know of a solution to actually reduce the size of the WINSXS folder? Or are we just destined to live with problem until we reinstall the OS and double the specification for just-in-case?
So the question is does anyone know of a solution to actually reduce the size of the WINSXS folder? Or are we just destined to live with problem until we reinstall the OS and double the specification for just-in-case?
ASKER
I'd like to keep this question to 'solutions' versus what else you can do. There are many discussions around the 'other' stuff such as the SP1 cleanup wizzard, and the 'link' method to fool the OS.
I'm looking for a solution, there are a lot of 'try this' suggestions available withing the Experts-Exchange system already.
I'm looking for a solution, there are a lot of 'try this' suggestions available withing the Experts-Exchange system already.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
I'm inclined to not believe there is 'no' solution. There was 'no' solution to running the new Windows Server Backup to a NAS and till maintain the storage management capabilities, but we found a solution, iscsi.
It is such a 'wrong' or 'bad' issue that I'm surprised that a solution has not come forth in 3 years. Along the lines of the Document and Settings folder on Terminal Services. Eventually a solution was put forth.
It is such a 'wrong' or 'bad' issue that I'm surprised that a solution has not come forth in 3 years. Along the lines of the Document and Settings folder on Terminal Services. Eventually a solution was put forth.
There is another tool as well provided after the SP2 install which is called component cleanup. You should get around 1 or 2 GB of space back
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
the original question was:
So the question is does anyone know of a solution to actually reduce the size of the WINSXS folder? Or are we just destined to live with problem until we reinstall the OS and double the specification for just-in-case?
Which is 2 part.
For part 1: No one knows of a solution. The lack of a resolution by MS in my mind does not constitute a solution , just the absence of someone outside MS creating a solution thus far.
For part 2: It appears we are destined to just double MS's specifications as they are suppose to limit the file to 15% but in the cases where they don't - tough - deal with it. As Dariusg has indicated, they really don't care.
So the question is does anyone know of a solution to actually reduce the size of the WINSXS folder? Or are we just destined to live with problem until we reinstall the OS and double the specification for just-in-case?
Which is 2 part.
For part 1: No one knows of a solution. The lack of a resolution by MS in my mind does not constitute a solution , just the absence of someone outside MS creating a solution thus far.
For part 2: It appears we are destined to just double MS's specifications as they are suppose to limit the file to 15% but in the cases where they don't - tough - deal with it. As Dariusg has indicated, they really don't care.
ASKER
My comment on 4/15 summarizes the rational for my awarding points. dariusg answered part 2 of the question and therefore was awarded 50% of the points. There was no answer for Part 1, therefore these points should not be awarded.
The solution was provided that currently there is no way to reduce size and most likely won't be. You can clean which will reduce size but you will never be able to get the size you want.
ASKER
The grammar of solution versus answer.
You answered part 2 but did not provide a solution to part 1.
You answered part 2 but did not provide a solution to part 1.
Again in your eyes that is not a solution to your liken but it is a solution.
ASKER
I have to disagree.
The first part was to present a solution. Not to have MS present a solution. He did not present a solution. He merely said MS has not provided a solution.
he did answer the 2nd question.
If you are going to be loose on grammar you should make that clear at the start. An answer is not a solution, could be but could not be also. In this case he presented an answer that had not solution. Therefore it did not fulfill the requirements of a 'solution.'
It can't be done is not a solution. It is an answer. I presented the question as a very high value and in 2 parts for a specific reason. If one can not actually present a solution they should not be awarded points for saying I don't know and MS has not given us, the community an answer, which I could regurgitate and be awarded points for the knowledge. I was specifically looking for an 'out of the box' thought process. I already knew that MS did not have a solution.
I will be much more careful with my questions in the future knowing that you don't respect the questions as presented, the content of the answers nor grammar as a whole.
If you are going to accept 'Answers' you should change all the buttons to say 'Answer Accepted' not 'Solution Accepted.' They are not the same. Could be, but are not in all situations.
From Websters: Solution: the act of solving a problem, question, etc.: The situation is approaching solution.
'Answering' only shows up in Mathematics
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/answer
The first part was to present a solution. Not to have MS present a solution. He did not present a solution. He merely said MS has not provided a solution.
he did answer the 2nd question.
If you are going to be loose on grammar you should make that clear at the start. An answer is not a solution, could be but could not be also. In this case he presented an answer that had not solution. Therefore it did not fulfill the requirements of a 'solution.'
It can't be done is not a solution. It is an answer. I presented the question as a very high value and in 2 parts for a specific reason. If one can not actually present a solution they should not be awarded points for saying I don't know and MS has not given us, the community an answer, which I could regurgitate and be awarded points for the knowledge. I was specifically looking for an 'out of the box' thought process. I already knew that MS did not have a solution.
I will be much more careful with my questions in the future knowing that you don't respect the questions as presented, the content of the answers nor grammar as a whole.
If you are going to accept 'Answers' you should change all the buttons to say 'Answer Accepted' not 'Solution Accepted.' They are not the same. Could be, but are not in all situations.
From Websters: Solution: the act of solving a problem, question, etc.: The situation is approaching solution.
'Answering' only shows up in Mathematics
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/answer
Now in Vista there was some tool you could run to clean out certain files from before SP1 for example but you would not be able to rollback to any update prior to this.
http://blogs.technet.com/b/askcore/archive/2008/09/17/what-is-the-winsxs-directory-in-windows-2008-and-windows-vista-and-why-is-it-so-large.aspx