windows server 2008 standard R2 memory support more 32GB

Thank you  :)
that I know
I look for more Sophisticated way

Take a look at PAE (Physical Address Extension). (Note: I haven't tested this myself, and can't confirm it, but other users have said they have.)

http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/windowsserver2008r2general/thread/11ba8acc-5213-4aef-b84d-ca4958301967/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

Again I haven't used it, so I'm no expert on it, but I hope I'm at least giving you some kind of starting point with this that helps.

I believe any modification to server standard which would allow more than 32GB of ram would be illegal and/or against the terms of service of using windows.

Hi there,

There was already a similar tread:

https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/27631596/Hyper-V-Manager-showing-32GB-RAM-available-but-I-have-48GB-Ram-installed-in-server.html

there it become clear,
"Windows 2008 R2 Standard" will not use more that 32GB. no matter if you see 48GB.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa366778(v=vs.85).aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_server_2008_r2

- Using PAE will not help. PAE could be used to extend the amount of memory which could be addressed from x86 bit system.

So - you should live with 32GB or upgrade to Enterprice.
Cheers
Svet.

As said, no expert, but yes it would have to be used on a 32-bit system only from what I understand.

There is no such thing as 32-bit Windows 2008 R2.
PAE has nothing to do with the question.

There is no issue. Windows 2008r2 Standard edition has no technical problem reading more than 32GB of RAM. It's simply not licensed to do so.

You should select n4th4nr1ch's comment as the answer - there is NO OTHER ANSWER that can be offered here.  Experts-exchange does NOT permit us to help you violate licensing; the limit is 32 GB in Standard - any method of increasing it - IF it exists - would be considered a hack and we are not allowed to post hacks.  If you need more RAM, purchase Enterprise.  Or virtualize using ESXi or Hyper-V server and create TWO servers (requiring a second Windows license).

Sorry if I'm being too blunt, but there really is no other answer that can be offered here.

well ...
good answer has always good explanation comming with it.
cheers
Svet.

Well, the obv answer was given in the beginning "no" which the user was already aware of (as was I, and everybody), and asked for more ideas. That was all I could find on the topic instead of just saying "no" myself.

With all due respect, no one can tell me which answer to accept
And questions do not always indicate that  I'm going to break rules.
However it is only wise to ask to see the ways and decide what to do , and I am responsible for what I doing!!
:)

Dear Tymetwister
I know your intentions are good and do not be afraid to demonstrate knowledge
I do not say "fuck the rules", but an open discussion should always be.

Thanks jud, I was just trying to throw some new ideas out there

Look, if everyone wants to waste their time here, so be it.  I posted because given my experiences over the years, when someone says "Thank you  :)  that I know I look for more Sophisticated way" it's not unreasonable to assume that they are either not familiar with licensing terms or they are looking for a way to circumvent them.  

Every post n4th4nr1ch has made has been correct. First with the correct answer that Standard does not support more than 32 GB of RAM, then with the explanation that it was a licensing limitation.

In my opinion the only other answer that would be worthy of SHARING points is sivanov's since he points out that you could upgrade to Enterprise.

I don't want points for this question, just to make sure no one tries to post any hacks or suggestions of hacks... such posts can result in a warning and repeated attempts suspension from the site.  Since hacks are not an option, the answer(s) should be pretty clear.

leew, I quickly stated in my post that I had not confirmed the solution myself, but that others have found it successful, and it was just a differ/possible alternative instead of posting "no," (which the asker specifically requested for more ideas after "no" was given) and to open the discussion up. No one is trying to suggest 'hacking' here. Please be fair in your judgments and comments, and look at the added details I added with my posts to this particular question.

If I created a mess I'm sorry  hacking it's not an option here on the site.
There is no intention to violate rules!
But I do not like being told what to do with why my insolent answer.
Let's close the issue.
again I'm sorry

Guys, collegues :-) lets keep it techinical.
It,s friday :-)
Cheers
Svet.


PS>
Jud  - you know that lots of people browse our treads and use the "accepted solution" to solve their cases.

Sometimes the answer is no, you can't.  PAE does NOTHING in this circumstance.  I took a brief look at the links you provided and found nothing of merit.  I did not say anyone WAS trying to hack things, I said the comments made were SUGGESTIVE of such intent or a lack of licensing knowledge and BEFORE someone posted something they shouldn't, I wanted to remind everyone hacks weren't permitted.

In writing my last post I suggested sivanov's comment was potentially worthy because of the Enterprise suggestion - problem is I missed that n4th4nr1ch actually suggested that in his first comment.

In my opinion, n4th4nr1ch has been done a disservice since his answer is clearly correct.

Jud  - you know that lots of people browse our treads and use the "accepted solution" to solve their cases.

That's an excellent point and one reason I sometimes jump in - there are no "up votes" here or other ways of saying an already posted comment is correct or the most correct so on occasion, I will add a "me to" and rephrase giving credit where it is due.

Yes, we all know WinServ08Std limits are 32GB. To answer the asker's follow-up question after the first comment, we went here:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa366778(v=vs.85).aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_server_2008_r2

(by the way, that is a microsoft website)

Which directed me to this quote here on that site:

Physical Memory Limits: Windows Server 2008
The following table specifies the limits on physical memory for Windows Server 2008. Limits greater than 4 GB for 32-bit Windows assume that PAE is enabled.

Which is why I pointed the user to PAE. Which is why I made the statement that it might be possible, but I admitted to not knowing but that's the closest I could find to answering the users follow-up question.

Leew
You're right and I said I was sorry.
It's just my nature can not take dictation.
It is an injustice to n4th4nr1ch
But there is no way to fix.
And sorry for my English not good

I'd also like to add that, the info about PAE expanding memory limits came off a Microsoft domain website as being a possibility for a solution, without MS giving reference to it being a possible illegal or "hacking" activity, so it gave me no indication to think so, therefore qualifies it to be an accepted solution to the users follow-up question. I said we should test it/discuss it but instead the question went this route. Well... in the spirit of dropping it, to quote Svet, Happy Friday everyone.