<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Virtual Server Maximums...</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/b/virtualization/archive/2007/08/14/virtual-server-maximums.aspx</link><description>Virtualization Nation, 
 In my last blog, I discussed the fact that with Virtual Server R2 SP1 we increased the amount of physical memory that Virtual Server can address from 64 GB to 256 GB. I saw that this prompted questions about other maximums for</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Evolution Platform Developer Build (Build: 5.6.50428.7875)</generator><item><title>Microsoft Virtual Server Maximums</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/b/virtualization/archive/2007/08/14/virtual-server-maximums.aspx#1751885</link><pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:08:53 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:1751885</guid><dc:creator>VMblog.com - Virtualization Information</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Jeff Woolsey, a Senior Program Manager at Microsoft focused on Microsoft Virtualization, just updated his blog with the latest information about the maximum values for other Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 R2 SP1. In addition to increasing the amount of&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=1751885" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>