Freigeben über

Can you run Windows Server 2012 R2 on Windows Server 2008 R2?

  • Artikel

I have been asked this question a couple of times recently.  The odd thing, to me anyway, is that most of the people who have asked me have stated:

I read this article: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc794868(v=ws.10).aspx about supported guest operating systems for Windows Server 2008 R2, and did not see Windows Server 2012 R2 listed.  Is it supported?

The answer is – no.  That is why it is not listed.

Generally speaking, we make sure that the we support the release immediately after the host operating system (i.e. 2012 on 2008 R2, 2012 R2 on 2012, etc…).  But we do not go beyond that.

If you really want to run Windows Server 2012 R2 in a virtual machine – I highly recommend that you upgrade your host first.  Besides which, there are so many great new features in Hyper-V in Windows Server 2012 and 2012 R2 that you should want to take advantage of!

Cheers,
Ben

Comments

  • Anonymous
    June 30, 2014
    I couldn't find any technet articles specifying that Win2012 R2 guest is supported on a Win2012 Hyper-v Host - can you confirm this is definitively supported and if there are any pre-reqs on the 2012 host e.g certain hotfixes or rollup updates? thanks

  • Anonymous
    June 30, 2014
    Ben, dont take it personally, but that's the main problem with all you guys living in the Redmond campus location: you tend to forget, that there is a whole planet Earth outside of your fences, and real world is ALWAYS more complicated than the sterile labs that you all have in your minds. People are forced into this inconvenient situation because of the way you guys think: we (your customers) must explicitly ask stupid-sounding questions like this one: "I see that version X or Y is not on the supportability page, so I have to ask whether version X or Y is supported by your product or not?" Its not that we cannot read or understand written text (some cannot, but hopefully those are the stupid minority..), but just because something is not in the supportability list, for us -mortal people living outside of the Redmond campus- that doesnt AUTOMATICALLY mean that it is not supported. What about mistakes, or missing entries? That wouldnt be a the first occurrence, as the product documents  are usually full of mistakes, missing statements, mambo-jambo-avoiding-direct-answer type of pharagraphs, etc. People in general (yes, that includes some of your MVPs and other evangelists as well) got lost in faith of your company in the recent couple of years of fiasco, so people only believe something, that they see with their own eyes, and not via some obfuscated or convoluted indirect reasoning. Let me gice you a real world example: If you see an excel spreadsheet with sh*tloads of columns, most of the cells are filled in, but some rows not all the columns are fileld in (=empty), what do you think first: a) ahaa, those columns are not filled in because those columns are not applicable to that particular row OR b) the secretary / HR / the author of the document made a stupid mistake / it was friday afternoon when he updated the filed, and missed some vital info Most of us will automatically assume option b) and not option a). I wonder how will the indirect (un)supportability idea work in front of the jury, when somebody will sue MS due to some information not written clearly in the documents. Lawyers prefer the truth that is written down rather than truth that "does not present as supported in the table, so it must only mean unsupported" This kind of logic caused more headache than it cured.

  • Anonymous
    July 01, 2014
    TR - This is a little confusing (I admit).  Because we did not change the support operating systems between Windows Server 2012 and Windows Server 2012 R2 - we just have a single article for both of them.  You can see it here: technet.microsoft.com/.../hh831531.aspx in the supported guest operating systems section.  Note that the top of this article states that it applies to both 2012 and 2012 R2. Soder - I understand your complaint, but you have made no recommendation to address it.  Documenting all unsupported configurations is not a viable option.  We do try to keep documentation up to date (and for reference, yes - I have had to handle numerous customer support escalations over incorrect documentation over the years).   One of the things we have done for a while now, to address exactly the kinds of concerns you are raising, is to have a "last modified" date on our articles.  In the case of the support article we are referring to here - it was last updated on November 2013.  So it would be reasonable to believe it is accurate. If you have any constructive suggestions on how we can improve our documentation here, please let me know. Cheers, Ben

  • Anonymous
    July 01, 2014
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    July 01, 2014
    Soder - Stating in our documentation that we will not be supporting any version past Windows Server 2012 on Windows Server 2008 R2 is a reasonable suggestion.  Thanks!  I will pass it on to the documentation team. Cheers, Ben

  • Anonymous
    July 01, 2014
    @ben: thanks for that, appreciate! Though, I will not hold my breath waiting for the result. I have been through such games already a couple of times with the Lync document team, with close to 0 effectiveness.

  • Anonymous
    July 03, 2014
    I can tell a secret, 2012r2 run very well on 2008r2...

  • Anonymous
    July 03, 2014
    @dude: and thats the other aspect of this entire comedy. Not supported != not working (more or less fine).

  • Anonymous
    July 05, 2014
    @Ben Armstrong [MSFT], Thanks for the nice article. Regarding the discussion about documentation, I have a suggestion (which you guys might already are familiar with). There is this new concept of writing articles, blogs, technical docs etc, a product of Indie-Web group. It hosts your documentation on source control (say GitHub's git private repo) and let reader suggest changes/improvements. The change action turn the text space into a markdown editor (like stackoverflow, codeplex and github) and eventually user sends a PR (pull-request). Once its accepted, the change would reflect on the original website. No databases, no complications.. This can bring a lot of goodness and cleanliness in MSDN/TechNet docs. Well if I am allowed to go a little beyond it, please suggest the Connect team, MSDN blog developers (third-party Telligent folks) and Social Forums devs to bring markdown editor in text areas. This will enhance the productivity and take this communication medium to next level of effectiveness. They can borrow it from Codeplex team. Thanks in anticipation.

  • Anonymous
    July 07, 2014
    Hi, @Ben Armstrong: thank you for this information. But, would this mean that if in near future there was a "Windows Server 9" and shortly afterwards a "Windows Server 9 R2" (like it was with Server 2012 and a year later Server 2012 R2), that Server 9 would be supported on a Server 2012 R2 Hyper-V Host, but Server 9 R2 would not be supported on a 2012 R2 Hyper-V Host? That would not be so nice because I'm running a Server 2012 R2 Hyper-V host which I don't want to upgrade for the next few years to ensure the existing VMs remain available without downtime, but I would like to install next Windows Server OS (R2) as a VM when it will be released. (But as "not supported" != "not working", I hope if Server 9 will be supported, following version will also work.)

  • Anonymous
    July 09, 2014
    This "upgrade or else!" support model worked well when there was one true Windows client version and one true Windows server, but now Microsoft should recognize that there's a plurality of Windows versions in the wild, and forcing people to upgrade is annoying them - if it happens too fast.

  • Anonymous
    July 16, 2014
    Hi @soder! We worked with Ben to make a few updates, based on your feedback, to the information about supported guest operating systems. We pulled the guest OS support information out of the current Hyper-V overview and split it into 2 topics:

  • Anonymous
    July 29, 2014
    When there is a free hypervisor product available, why not upgrade? :)

  • Anonymous
    September 09, 2014
    So what about Win8.1?

  • Anonymous
    October 28, 2014
    Wait a minute.  Windows Server 2008 R2 is still under mainstream support.  You're not supposed to start abandoning your products until the "extended" support phase.  It's not unreasonable for your customers to expect you to fully support a product, with full interoperability, during the mainstream support phase.   If there really are great reasons to upgrade Windows on the physical systems, then allow your customers to choose to do that for all those great reasons.

  • Anonymous
    January 07, 2015
    Funny. VM  Ware seems to be okay with me running more than one version ahead. This limitation has you at a disadvantage competitivly.

  • Anonymous
    January 07, 2015
    Zack - I am afraid you are quite wrong there.  VMware did not start supporting 2012 R2 guests until ESX 5.0.  If you are running ESX 3 or 4 you will need to upgrade ESX to run a 2012 R2 guest.  So I think you will find that their support policy is just like ours. Cheers, Ben

  • Anonymous
    February 13, 2015
    I believe you are incorrect.... Server guest operating system Editions Virtual processors Windows Server® 2012, only on a server running Windows Server 2008 R2 or Windows Server 2008 R2 Service Pack 1 (SP1), with a hotfix applied. To read about and download the hotfix, see support.microsoft.com/.../2744129.

  • Anonymous
    July 30, 2015
    I also think that everything should be supported on a product that is under Mainstream support! So, every new server (SQL, Exchange...) SHOULD be supported to install on a product that is under Mainstream support. It also means that Windows 2012R2 should be supported as guest to install on Windows 2008R2SP1 Hyper-V (with or without non-security hotfix), since latter was still under Mainstream support when 2012R2 came out. When a product enters Extended support, then only security updates should be available.

  • Anonymous
    August 07, 2015
    Apples and oranges for the version cadence of VMware and Hyper-V.  A newer version of VMWare can be installed on an older OS to test the newer OS.  We need the new OS to get the newer Hyper-V.  If you upgrade the OS every version, then you are covered to test the next version.  If you skip versions, VMware....   kb.vmware.com/.../search.do VMware Workstation 10 can run on XP to 8.1.  That's a lot of versions.  Workstation 11 support starts with Windows 7.  Will either be supported on Windows 10 and beyond?  VMWare on XP goes forward a bit more than 1.  Actually, it does not really go forward at all because the OS is not a reference.   The 2 versions back and one forward is common.  For example VS with TFS.  SQL clients and SQL servers - the client can be 2 back or one forward?  Or is that the server that can be one forward of the client?  Anyway, it's confusing.  Trying to keep a single set of stuff all supported means that we have to upgrade often - or sometimes hold back on an upgrade.  I wanted to use Windows 2012 R2 with TFS 2012, but that's not supported.  The SharePoint 2013 with TFS 2012 was supported, but the TFS 2012 install did not support this.  SQL 2012 is not supported for TFS 2012.  Oh, SSMS in SQL 2012 uses VS 2010.  I want to upgrade TFS, but the VS 2008 stuff has to be upgraded first.  VS 2012 update 4 installs SQL 2014.  I guess that was supported on my OS.  Now add Hyper-V.  With so many products depending on each other's versions, it's a wonder they can be supported at the same time.   I sure would like a Windows Server Forever, SQL Server Forever, TFS Forever, and a VS Forever.  Products too tightly couple should be consider one product and sold as such.   There has to be some give.  Perhaps a few key products have to have more forward and backward compatibility to allow the other products to have a full lifecycle.  

  • Anonymous
    August 07, 2015
    Typo.  TFS 2012 is supported on SQL 2012.  I think it's SQL 2012 SP2 that's not supported.  

  • Anonymous
    June 06, 2016
    This works as long as you have update KB2744129 installed on the host, it was pushed out by Windows update back in 2012. We've been running WS2012 and WS2012 R2 guests on WS2008 R2 hosts for at least a year without any issues.