Thanks for this thread. I realize that being careful is the way to avoid this issue, but my question is, why is this change even possible in SQL Server? The max memory setting should never accept a value below the minimum SQL Server needs to start up, shouldn't it? I just don't see the point of allowing 0 to be set for max server memory.
Just curious.
Thanks,
webrunner
-------------------
A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and asks, "Can I join you?"
Ref.: http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2009/02/sql-joke.html