How can I tell which version of Exchange I'm running.

I am experiencing high usage around 500k for store.exe. I was reading that
applying this patch will help with this porocess and reduce the usage.

The patch is for Exchange server 2000 SP3 only. How can I tell if I have
Ex2000 SP3?

Under system manager, "about exchange system" I pulled up this.
Version: 6.5.6944.0

Can I apply the patch without messing anything up?

Thanks,
Greg

Several issues here. 6.5 is Exchange 2003, which you would have if you are
running SBS 2003. 6944 is not the current version, so you do need to apply
Exchange Server SP2.

More importantly, 500 mb is not an excessive amount of RAM for Exchange to
use - that's an automated process, Exchange will release the RAM as it's
needed by other applications, and you should definitely not try to modify
that process in any way.
Exchange SP2, and configuring the new IMF that's included in the SP.



"GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B8E95F07-6021-4B79-BF17-D65EDB74CC3C@microsoft.com...
>I am experiencing high usage around 500k for store.exe. I was reading that
> applying this patch will help with this porocess and reduce the usage.
>
> The patch is for Exchange server 2000 SP3 only. How can I tell if I have
> Ex2000 SP3?
>
> Under system manager, "about exchange system" I pulled up this.
> Version: 6.5.6944.0
>
> Can I apply the patch without messing anything up?
>
> Thanks,
> Greg

Dave,

Thanks for the help. I am running SBS2003, Standard from a purchased verion.
So, it looks like this version of 2003 shipped with the wrong Exchange
version, correct? So your saying I should download and apply the Exchange
SP2. Then download and apply SP3? or just download SP3.

Thanks,
Greg

"Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" wrote:

> Several issues here. 6.5 is Exchange 2003, which you would have if you are
> running SBS 2003. 6944 is not the current version, so you do need to apply
> Exchange Server SP2.
>
> More importantly, 500 mb is not an excessive amount of RAM for Exchange to
> use - that's an automated process, Exchange will release the RAM as it's
> needed by other applications, and you should definitely not try to modify
> that process in any way.
> Exchange SP2, and configuring the new IMF that's included in the SP.
>
>
>
> "GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B8E95F07-6021-4B79-BF17-D65EDB74CC3C@microsoft.com...
> >I am experiencing high usage around 500k for store.exe. I was reading that
> > applying this patch will help with this porocess and reduce the usage.
> >
> > The patch is for Exchange server 2000 SP3 only. How can I tell if I have
> > Ex2000 SP3?
> >
> > Under system manager, "about exchange system" I pulled up this.
> > Version: 6.5.6944.0
> >
> > Can I apply the patch without messing anything up?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Greg
>
>
>

There is no SP3 for Exchange 2003 (yet at least). Do you have SBS 2003 SP1
installed as that is required before you could install Exchange SP2?

"GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F7B6B8A6-37C5-420E-AF15-2D7E02E69E6B@microsoft.com...
> Dave,
>
> Thanks for the help. I am running SBS2003, Standard from a purchased
> verion.
> So, it looks like this version of 2003 shipped with the wrong Exchange
> version, correct? So your saying I should download and apply the Exchange
> SP2. Then download and apply SP3? or just download SP3.
>
> Thanks,
> Greg
>
> "Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" wrote:
>
>> Several issues here. 6.5 is Exchange 2003, which you would have if you
>> are
>> running SBS 2003. 6944 is not the current version, so you do need to
>> apply
>> Exchange Server SP2.
>>
>> More importantly, 500 mb is not an excessive amount of RAM for Exchange
>> to
>> use - that's an automated process, Exchange will release the RAM as it's
>> needed by other applications, and you should definitely not try to modify
>> that process in any way.
>> installing
>> Exchange SP2, and configuring the new IMF that's included in the SP.
>>
>>
>>
>> "GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:B8E95F07-6021-4B79-BF17-D65EDB74CC3C@microsoft.com...
>> >I am experiencing high usage around 500k for store.exe. I was reading
>> >that
>> > applying this patch will help with this porocess and reduce the usage.
>> >
>> > The patch is for Exchange server 2000 SP3 only. How can I tell if I
>> > have
>> > Ex2000 SP3?
>> >
>> > Under system manager, "about exchange system" I pulled up this.
>> > Version: 6.5.6944.0
>> >
>> > Can I apply the patch without messing anything up?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Greg
>>
>>
>>

No, you've got the right version, it's just not up on all its service packs.
Your original post referenced Exchange 2000, which would have come with SBS
2000. SBS 2003 is supposed to have Exchange 2003, which is what you've got.
So you need to install Exchange 2003 SP2, not Exchange 2000 SP3.



"GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F7B6B8A6-37C5-420E-AF15-2D7E02E69E6B@microsoft.com...
> Dave,
>
> Thanks for the help. I am running SBS2003, Standard from a purchased
> verion.
> So, it looks like this version of 2003 shipped with the wrong Exchange
> version, correct? So your saying I should download and apply the Exchange
> SP2. Then download and apply SP3? or just download SP3.
>
> Thanks,
> Greg
>
> "Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" wrote:
>
>> Several issues here. 6.5 is Exchange 2003, which you would have if you
>> are
>> running SBS 2003. 6944 is not the current version, so you do need to
>> apply
>> Exchange Server SP2.
>>
>> More importantly, 500 mb is not an excessive amount of RAM for Exchange
>> to
>> use - that's an automated process, Exchange will release the RAM as it's
>> needed by other applications, and you should definitely not try to modify
>> that process in any way.
>> installing
>> Exchange SP2, and configuring the new IMF that's included in the SP.
>>
>>
>>
>> "GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:B8E95F07-6021-4B79-BF17-D65EDB74CC3C@microsoft.com...
>> >I am experiencing high usage around 500k for store.exe. I was reading
>> >that
>> > applying this patch will help with this porocess and reduce the usage.
>> >
>> > The patch is for Exchange server 2000 SP3 only. How can I tell if I
>> > have
>> > Ex2000 SP3?
>> >
>> > Under system manager, "about exchange system" I pulled up this.
>> > Version: 6.5.6944.0
>> >
>> > Can I apply the patch without messing anything up?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Greg
>>

Accoring to Dave I do have Exchange with SP1. In this artice they say the
system requirement are SP3 for exchange, that is why I thought there is SP3.
However now I am confused.

System Requirements
Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Server
Exchange 2000 with SP3 already installed

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

Good, thanks for the help. If I can't find the service pack I may have to
request its location.

Thanks,
Greg

"Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" wrote:

> No, you've got the right version, it's just not up on all its service packs.
> Your original post referenced Exchange 2000, which would have come with SBS
> 2000. SBS 2003 is supposed to have Exchange 2003, which is what you've got.
> So you need to install Exchange 2003 SP2, not Exchange 2000 SP3.
>
>
>
> "GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:F7B6B8A6-37C5-420E-AF15-2D7E02E69E6B@microsoft.com...
> > Dave,
> >
> > Thanks for the help. I am running SBS2003, Standard from a purchased
> > verion.
> > So, it looks like this version of 2003 shipped with the wrong Exchange
> > version, correct? So your saying I should download and apply the Exchange
> > SP2. Then download and apply SP3? or just download SP3.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Greg
> >
> > "Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> Several issues here. 6.5 is Exchange 2003, which you would have if you
> >> are
> >> running SBS 2003. 6944 is not the current version, so you do need to
> >> apply
> >> Exchange Server SP2.
> >>
> >> More importantly, 500 mb is not an excessive amount of RAM for Exchange
> >> to
> >> use - that's an automated process, Exchange will release the RAM as it's
> >> needed by other applications, and you should definitely not try to modify
> >> that process in any way.
> >>
> >> installing
> >> Exchange SP2, and configuring the new IMF that's included in the SP.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:B8E95F07-6021-4B79-BF17-D65EDB74CC3C@microsoft.com...
> >> >I am experiencing high usage around 500k for store.exe. I was reading
> >> >that
> >> > applying this patch will help with this porocess and reduce the usage.
> >> >
> >> > The patch is for Exchange server 2000 SP3 only. How can I tell if I
> >> > have
> >> > Ex2000 SP3?
> >> >
> >> > Under system manager, "about exchange system" I pulled up this.
> >> > Version: 6.5.6944.0
> >> >
> >> > Can I apply the patch without messing anything up?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Greg
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>

You don't have Exchange 2000 on your SBS 2003.

"GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7272808A-8F38-435F-89D3-694B377DBEA1@microsoft.com...
> Accoring to Dave I do have Exchange with SP1. In this artice they say the
> system requirement are SP3 for exchange, that is why I thought there is
> SP3.
> However now I am confused.
>
> System Requirements
> Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Server
> Exchange 2000 with SP3 already installed
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en
>
>

My mistake, sorry about that.

"Steve" wrote:

> You don't have Exchange 2000 on your SBS 2003.
>
> "GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:7272808A-8F38-435F-89D3-694B377DBEA1@microsoft.com...
> > Accoring to Dave I do have Exchange with SP1. In this artice they say the
> > system requirement are SP3 for exchange, that is why I thought there is
> > SP3.
> > However now I am confused.
> >
> > System Requirements
> > Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Server
> > Exchange 2000 with SP3 already installed
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en
> >
> >
>
>
>

Steve makes a good point about SBS SP1. If you do not have that installed,
I would recommend installing SBS SP1, but substituting Exchange SP2 for
Exchange SP1 in the normal installation process.


"GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:33041034-2632-47FD-8C5A-ABA12339AAC9@microsoft.com...
> Good, thanks for the help. If I can't find the service pack I may have to
> request its location.
>
> Thanks,
> Greg
>
> "Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" wrote:
>
>> No, you've got the right version, it's just not up on all its service
>> packs.
>> Your original post referenced Exchange 2000, which would have come with
>> SBS
>> 2000. SBS 2003 is supposed to have Exchange 2003, which is what you've
>> got.
>> So you need to install Exchange 2003 SP2, not Exchange 2000 SP3.
>>
>>
>>
>> "GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:F7B6B8A6-37C5-420E-AF15-2D7E02E69E6B@microsoft.com...
>> > Dave,
>> >
>> > Thanks for the help. I am running SBS2003, Standard from a purchased
>> > verion.
>> > So, it looks like this version of 2003 shipped with the wrong Exchange
>> > version, correct? So your saying I should download and apply the
>> > Exchange
>> > SP2. Then download and apply SP3? or just download SP3.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Greg
>> >
>> > "Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Several issues here. 6.5 is Exchange 2003, which you would have if
>> >> you
>> >> are
>> >> running SBS 2003. 6944 is not the current version, so you do need to
>> >> apply
>> >> Exchange Server SP2.
>> >>
>> >> More importantly, 500 mb is not an excessive amount of RAM for
>> >> Exchange
>> >> to
>> >> use - that's an automated process, Exchange will release the RAM as
>> >> it's
>> >> needed by other applications, and you should definitely not try to
>> >> modify
>> >> that process in any way.
>> >> installing
>> >> Exchange SP2, and configuring the new IMF that's included in the SP.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "GTP" <GTP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:B8E95F07-6021-4B79-BF17-D65EDB74CC3C@microsoft.com...
>> >> >I am experiencing high usage around 500k for store.exe. I was reading
>> >> >that
>> >> > applying this patch will help with this porocess and reduce the
>> >> > usage.
>> >> >
>> >> > The patch is for Exchange server 2000 SP3 only. How can I tell if I
>> >> > have
>> >> > Ex2000 SP3?
>> >> >
>> >> > Under system manager, "about exchange system" I pulled up this.
>> >> > Version: 6.5.6944.0
>> >> >
>> >> > Can I apply the patch without messing anything up?
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks,
>> >> > Greg
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>

A lot of 'techno babble', no flame intended, but really frustrating to all too often find so few answers in forum (where the common users can read and recognize them as a useable answer that most will be able to understand).

I'm 'simply' trying to find out if my 2009 Acer (XPH w/SP3, x86) is running Windiws Server 2003 (as there's a hotfix for event error 51 when no data is being lost, ie; my EHDs are getting this error almost constantly, no real issues with the EHD that I can tell except pretty frequentrly they don't properly list as what I've named them ('EHD1' etc) and instead are listing as 'Local Drive' and worse, no directory is seen when they list that way.

I've been working around the snafu by using windows safe removal ("stop"), then unplugging the offending EHD, powering it off-on, then plugging it back in. Then it lists properly as 'EHD1' and also the directory's then accessible.

Again no flame intended, but there is a lack of simplicity in forum replies that loses many, many readers. Heck my google got me here despite the keywords of how do I tell if I'm running Windows Server 2003 and here I instead find "SQS" (?) and exchange server which seems a little like 'techno-babble' and/or calling apples oranges (like so often is done by everyone naimg stuff something different) and if I'm worng, so be it (and this string's not about Windows Servers), sorry, but I just can't seem to find forums where replies don't usually exceed newbie and even advanced newbie venacular.

Advanced thanks for not taking offense and even more thanks for an answer to my question (that even I can understand).

WGURU
When you reply to a post in http://forums.techarena.in
it shows up as a broken thread on a Microsoft Public newsgroup

Specifically
NewsServer: msnews.microsoft.com
newsgroup: microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs

This site.
http://forums.techarena.in/small-business-server/
Copies Posts from Microsoft Break/Fix SBS newsgroup.

So Any responding or posting means that 99% of the world will not know what
you are responding to.
(Since it will be a broken thread on the original source.)

In your current post we have no reference to what you are talking about.

If you avoid Techarena.in and post directly to the Microsoft
newsgroup you will benefit from threads not getting broken.
And a lot of misunderstanding.

You can either use a NNTP News Reader (Example Outlook Express)
And set it up with:
NewsServer: msnews.microsoft.com
newsgroup: microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs
or By Clicking Below
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...ows.server.sbs


If you wish a "WEB" Based interface with NO Ad's you can go directly to this
forum with.
http://www.microsoft.com/communities...dows.server.sb
s&cat=en_US_e18fea59-512f-421e-b9f3-3e1f643123f2&lang=en&cr=US
It has the feature to notify you on a reply also.

To Search for issues in the past the best way is to Google them.
http://groups.google.com/group/micro...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
This has way more information than that website will ever have and help you
to stay connected.

Thanks
I hope you find this information helpful.


--
Russell Grover - SBITS.Biz [SBS-MVP]
Microsoft Gold Certified Partner
Microsoft Certified Small Business Specialist
Microsoft Online Services - http://www.microsoft-online-services.com/



"wguru" <wguru.3wy2jb@DoNotSpam.com> wrote in message
news:wguru.3wy2jb@DoNotSpam.com...
>
> A lot of 'techno babble', no flame intended, but really frustrating to
> all too often find so few answers in forum (where the common users can
> read and recognize them as a useable answer that most will be able to
> understand).
>
> I'm 'simply' trying to find out if my 2009 Acer (XPH w/SP3, x86) is
> running Windiws Server 2003 (as there's a hotfix for event error 51 when
> no data is being lost, ie; my EHDs are getting this error almost
> constantly, no real issues with the EHD that I can tell except pretty
> frequentrly they don't properly list as what I've named them ('EHD1'
> etc) and instead are listing as 'Local Drive' and worse, no directory is
> seen when they list that way.
>
> I've been working around the snafu by using windows safe removal
> ("stop"), then unplugging the offending EHD, powering it off-on, then
> plugging itr back in. Then it lists properly as 'EHD1' and also the
> dorefctory is then accessible.
>
> Again no flame intended, but there is a lack of simplicity in forum
> replies that loses many, many readers. Heck my google got me here
> despite the keywords of how do I tell if I'm running Windos Serer 2003
> and here I find what I see as "SQS" (?) 'techno-babble' (exceeding
> newbie and even advanced newbie venacular).
>
> Advanced thanks for not taking offense and even more thanks for an
> answer to my question (that even I can understand).
>
>
> --
> wguru
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> wguru's Profile: http://forums.techarena.in/members/105183.htm
> View this thread:
> How can I tell which version of Exchange I'm running.
>
> http://forums.techarena.in
>

Speaking of techno babble, What's a EHD?

To find out if you are running Windows 2003

Start
Control panel
System
What's does it say there as the OS you are running?

SQS? I think you mean SBS.
Small Business Server

And it's frustrating to use newsgroupers when a forum has pulled
newsgroup content from 2007 out that is about the version of the email
program in Small Business Server and from our side this random thread
that pops in out of no where is techno babble as well.



wguru wrote:
> A lot of 'techno babble', no flame intended, but really frustrating to
> all too often find so few answers in forum (where the common users can
> read and recognize them as a useable answer that most will be able to
> understand).
>
> I'm 'simply' trying to find out if my 2009 Acer (XPH w/SP3, x86) is
> running Windiws Server 2003 (as there's a hotfix for event error 51 when
> no data is being lost, ie; my EHDs are getting this error almost
> constantly, no real issues with the EHD that I can tell except pretty
> frequentrly they don't properly list as what I've named them ('EHD1'
> etc) and instead are listing as 'Local Drive' and worse, no directory is
> seen when they list that way.
>
> I've been working around the snafu by using windows safe removal
> ("stop"), then unplugging the offending EHD, powering it off-on, then
> plugging itr back in. Then it lists properly as 'EHD1' and also the
> dorefctory is then accessible.
>
> Again no flame intended, but there is a lack of simplicity in forum
> replies that loses many, many readers. Heck my google got me here
> despite the keywords of how do I tell if I'm running Windos Serer 2003
> and here I find what I see as "SQS" (?) 'techno-babble' (exceeding
> newbie and even advanced newbie venacular).
>
> Advanced thanks for not taking offense and even more thanks for an
> answer to my question (that even I can understand).
>
>

Start run winver and enter?
Right click My Computer Properties?

Elevated Higher Dimension
external hard drive?
sequential queueing service?

On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 00:40:58 -0700, Susan Bradley
<sbradcpa@pacbell.net> wrote:

>Speaking of techno babble, What's a EHD?
>
>To find out if you are running Windows 2003
>
>Start
>Control panel
>System
>What's does it say there as the OS you are running?
>
>SQS? I think you mean SBS.
>Small Business Server
>
>And it's frustrating to use newsgroupers when a forum has pulled
>newsgroup content from 2007 out that is about the version of the email
>program in Small Business Server and from our side this random thread
>that pops in out of no where is techno babble as well.
>
>
>
>wguru wrote:
>> A lot of 'techno babble', no flame intended, but really frustrating to
>> all too often find so few answers in forum (where the common users can
>> read and recognize them as a useable answer that most will be able to
>> understand).
>>
>> I'm 'simply' trying to find out if my 2009 Acer (XPH w/SP3, x86) is
>> running Windiws Server 2003 (as there's a hotfix for event error 51 when
>> no data is being lost, ie; my EHDs are getting this error almost
>> constantly, no real issues with the EHD that I can tell except pretty
>> frequentrly they don't properly list as what I've named them ('EHD1'
>> etc) and instead are listing as 'Local Drive' and worse, no directory is
>> seen when they list that way.
>>
>> I've been working around the snafu by using windows safe removal
>> ("stop"), then unplugging the offending EHD, powering it off-on, then
>> plugging itr back in. Then it lists properly as 'EHD1' and also the
>> dorefctory is then accessible.
>>
>> Again no flame intended, but there is a lack of simplicity in forum
>> replies that loses many, many readers. Heck my google got me here
>> despite the keywords of how do I tell if I'm running Windos Serer 2003
>> and here I find what I see as "SQS" (?) 'techno-babble' (exceeding
>> newbie and even advanced newbie venacular).
>>
>> Advanced thanks for not taking offense and even more thanks for an
>> answer to my question (that even I can understand).
>>
>>
See what SBS support is working on
http://blogs.technet.com/sbs/default.aspx
Check your SBS with the SBS Best Practices Analyzer
http://blogs.technet.com/sbs/archive...A/default.aspx

I would argue that microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs
is not a newsgroup for the "Average" user
especially some of the content we talk about.
and Techno Babble is kind of a minimum requirement?
Wouldn't you agree? ;)
Russ

--
Russell Grover - SBITS.Biz [SBS-MVP]
Microsoft Gold Certified Partner
Microsoft Certified Small Business Specialist
World Wide 24hr SBS Remote Support - http://www.SBITS.Biz
Microsoft Online Services - http://www.microsoft-online-services.com/



"Susan Bradley" <sbradcpa@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:O7q87uXHKHA.6068@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Speaking of techno babble, What's a EHD?
>
> To find out if you are running Windows 2003
>
> Start
> Control panel
> System
> What's does it say there as the OS you are running?
>
> SQS? I think you mean SBS.
> Small Business Server
>
> And it's frustrating to use newsgroupers when a forum has pulled newsgroup
> content from 2007 out that is about the version of the email program in
> Small Business Server and from our side this random thread that pops in
> out of no where is techno babble as well.
>
>
>
> wguru wrote:
>> A lot of 'techno babble', no flame intended, but really frustrating to
>> all too often find so few answers in forum (where the common users can
>> read and recognize them as a useable answer that most will be able to
>> understand).
>>
>> I'm 'simply' trying to find out if my 2009 Acer (XPH w/SP3, x86) is
>> running Windiws Server 2003 (as there's a hotfix for event error 51 when
>> no data is being lost, ie; my EHDs are getting this error almost
>> constantly, no real issues with the EHD that I can tell except pretty
>> frequentrly they don't properly list as what I've named them ('EHD1'
>> etc) and instead are listing as 'Local Drive' and worse, no directory is
>> seen when they list that way.
>>
>> I've been working around the snafu by using windows safe removal
>> ("stop"), then unplugging the offending EHD, powering it off-on, then
>> plugging itr back in. Then it lists properly as 'EHD1' and also the
>> dorefctory is then accessible.
>>
>> Again no flame intended, but there is a lack of simplicity in forum
>> replies that loses many, many readers. Heck my google got me here
>> despite the keywords of how do I tell if I'm running Windos Serer 2003
>> and here I find what I see as "SQS" (?) 'techno-babble' (exceeding
>> newbie and even advanced newbie venacular).
>>
>> Advanced thanks for not taking offense and even more thanks for an
>> answer to my question (that even I can understand).
>>
>>