Immortal
Immortal

2008 R2 Template

Jump to solution

I was wondering how many users remove  the 100 MB partition on 2008 R2 vs how many just leave it in place. 

Tags (2)
0 Kudos
1 Solution

Accepted Solutions
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

I'm also looking into if this partition is needed.  A quick google search came up with this:

I researched why this partition is there, and I learned that it is to  prepare the server for BitLocker — if it is configured and it functions  as a boot loader. (Note: If a drive will receive a new  Windows Server 2008 install, yet there is already a boot loader in place  for one or more operating systems, System Reserved Partition may not be  created.)

On the System Reserved Partition, there is nothing much of interest. Figure C shows Windows Server 2008 R2’s reserved partition viewed through a recovery tool.

Source

I guess the answer is if you never plan on using any BitLocker functions then removing it is safe.  I'd at least recommend doing a bit more searching around to validate that there is nothing else on that partition that could be of value in the future.  100MB isn't an earth shattering ammount and the effort to remove it might be more than it's worth then just leaving it.

Who knows, there may be some need to use and configure BitLocker as a boot loader in the future that you won't be able to meet because that partition was removed.

Not sure if this was helpful...

Cheers,

Ken

View solution in original post

0 Kudos
4 Replies
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

I'm also looking into if this partition is needed.  A quick google search came up with this:

I researched why this partition is there, and I learned that it is to  prepare the server for BitLocker — if it is configured and it functions  as a boot loader. (Note: If a drive will receive a new  Windows Server 2008 install, yet there is already a boot loader in place  for one or more operating systems, System Reserved Partition may not be  created.)

On the System Reserved Partition, there is nothing much of interest. Figure C shows Windows Server 2008 R2’s reserved partition viewed through a recovery tool.

Source

I guess the answer is if you never plan on using any BitLocker functions then removing it is safe.  I'd at least recommend doing a bit more searching around to validate that there is nothing else on that partition that could be of value in the future.  100MB isn't an earth shattering ammount and the effort to remove it might be more than it's worth then just leaving it.

Who knows, there may be some need to use and configure BitLocker as a boot loader in the future that you won't be able to meet because that partition was removed.

Not sure if this was helpful...

Cheers,

Ken

View solution in original post

0 Kudos

We remove it - always.

Our R2 builds are done using SCCM and we do not plan on using BitLocker or similar - so do not provision the 100MB partition.

One day I will virtualise myself . . .
Immortal
Immortal

Hello.

I always leave it in place.

Good Luck!

Brian Atkinson | vExpert | VMTN Moderator | Author of "VCP5-DCV VMware Certified Professional-Data Center Virtualization on vSphere 5.5 Study Guide: VCP-550" | @vmroyale | http://vmroyale.com
Immortal
Immortal

Thanks for the replies.  I already have a template built and was thinking about removing it since we will not use Bitlocker.   I wonder if it will be more difficult to remove it from the exisiting template or just build a new one?

I also came accross something that said the extra partition can cause issues with snapshot based backup technologies.  I haven't had a chance to test that but may be one reason why it needs to be removed.  

0 Kudos