Not enough server storage

Tue, 2007-07-17 11:58 by admin · Forum/category:

Error messages:

  • Not enough server storage is available to process this command.
  • Not enough memory to complete transaction. Close some applications and retry.

These error messages on a computer, which we will call computer A, can indicate the IRPStackSize bug on the other machine, the server that has the share, which we will call computer B. Go to that other computer, B, open the event log, and check for event ID 2011. If this is present, it is a strong indication for this particular bug. The two computers again:

  1. The computer trying to access a share on the other computer over the network, displays the error message, "Not enough …". Let's call this one the client.
  2. The server where the share is, needs to have its IRPStackSize parameter increased. Let's call this one the server, even if it is just a desktop computer.

To repair it, you have to set or increase the IRPStackSize parameter in the registry on the server where the share is, i.e. on computer B.

There are many reports (below), indicating that a value of 15 is not enough, and only values in the range of 16 to 25 solved the problem.

The most successful values used to be 16 and 18, but recently we have more reports of 20 and more. If you want to solve the problem quickly, try 20.

It is not quite clear whether higher values incur any cost in terms of memory usage or performance, but it is conceivable that they don't. If so, then we probably should just set the value to its maximum of 50 and forget about it.

And don't forget to reboot after each change, because only that makes the new value effective. Thanks to everybody who tested and reported!

Please add a comment below to report which value you used to make it work. If you find the time to experiment, please report the lowest value that worked. Please try also to set it back to a lower value and recheck whether that indeed makes it fail. Reboot after each change.

Here is the offending registry value:

IRPStackSize DWORD 0x0000000f (15)

Check for the presence of the value named IRPStackSize. If it doesn't exist, create it as type DWORD and make sure you have the capitalization absolutely correct (5 upper case, 7 lower case characters), because the system strangely seems to depend on that. Make sure also that you haven't by mistake added a leading or trailing space as described in this comment below.

With base set to decimal, enter the value 16 or higher. 15 is the default, so entering 15 should have the same effect as removing that value altogether.

Reboot the computer (or restart the server service, as described in the comment below: Worked for me).

Certain software, when installed on the server, also causes this error. One frequent culprit is

  • Norton AntiVirus,

which tends to change the registry parameter. See also: How to remove Norton software. Other culprits seem to be

  • Acronis TrueImage, version 10 or 2009 or higher,
  • Seagate DiscWizard (a rebranded version of Acronis TrueImage),
  • IBM AntiVirus,
  • Microsoft's Bitdefender, and
  • Symantec EndPoint Protection (version 11+),
  • AVG 2011+.

Some reports state that only uninstalling solves the problem. If you have such a case, please report your findings here.

Check also this Microsoft Knowledge Base article. It does not mention Windows XP, but applies to XP as well.

Antivirus Software May Cause Event ID 2011 (Q177078)

Thanks for reporting

Wed, 2009-05-06 05:48 by admin

16 works in many cases, but some others seem to need something around 18. The cause of these differences is still in the dark.

At least we have a well-working workaround.

It Worked!

Sat, 2009-04-18 11:36 by hrrmph

Thanks! The registry tweak works well.

I have a home fileserver with a lot of internal drives and partitions as well as an external hard drive enclosure connected to the server via USB and a USB printer. Other computers could see the description and drive letter for the external USB drive, but got the "Not enough server storage..." error message when trying to access any of the files stored on it.

I checked the registry and the key wasn't there. So I entered it and set a decimal value of (16). I separately tried restarting the Server service, logging out of and back into windows, and rebooting, all to no avail.

I cruised the nearby keys and noticed that there were 16 shares listed. Not sure that it matters, but it made me think that a higher number would be better for the stack size.

So I tried the suggested value of decimal (25). After I made the change, all it took to get everything working again was a restart of the Server service via Administrative Tools.

Thanks again!

yes, got it fixed!

Thu, 2009-04-16 15:12 by ikke


I finally got it fixed for my external usb drive, after seeing it for a few (2-3 days, but never before that) but it could have been resolved by either of two things

- i played around with the different values for the stacksize, but nothing helped, but i didn't reboot each time, but restarted the services, only the last time (see below) i rebooted, so it could be that a reboot was necessary and the value 25 helped.

- i completely forgot it, but a spontaneous occurring vprorecovery.ini on the external drive after a convert/format to ntfs (from fat32, even tried that) helped me to remember that i had a trial version of norton (yes norton again!) ghost which accidentally expired a few days ago. Removing and rebooting resolved it.

... but I can't be sure what did the trick, but the expiring norton around the time that the issue started is too much of a coincidence in my humble opinion.



Not enough server storage - only one share causes the error

Mon, 2009-03-23 17:39 by Philbgood

Thanks for providing this solution . I had this when trying to map a drive on my XP Pro desktop from my Vista Notebook . In my case i could map any share on the XP box ( 10 drives up to 400G in size) except one which gave me this error . This drive was a USB ext 750G HDD . Applying the registry change with a value of 16 and restarting the server service fixed the problem .

XP box has Norton 360 and trial of Acronis True Image Home 2009 but i can't say that either "broke" the sharing as I hadn't mapped this USB drive before they were installed . I had mapped other drives before and they were all unaffected .

I thought this might be significant but I don't know how .


Mon, 2009-03-23 19:34 by admin

Your comment does contain useful information. The fact that only one (external) disk drive was affected is interesting. You also confirm that Norton and Acronis software is suspicious.

Take my general recommendation against all things Norton or Symantec. I've seen far too many problems with that kind of software.

Not enough storage is available to process this command

Thu, 2009-02-26 17:37 by Gusta

Thanks guys for all your helpful post. But how do I resolve this error in the event that I cannot even logon to the server. I am completely shut out of the server.

On system logon to Window Server 2003. I get this error.
System cannot log you on due to the following error Not enough storage is available to process this command.

Logging on locally?

Thu, 2009-02-26 17:51 by admin

Are you trying to log on with the keyboard that is directly connected to the server? If not, try that.

If this fails, pull the network cable from the computer to interrupt all its connections, for example to the domain controller that may be involved in the logon process. Then try again, perhaps after a reboot, a hard reboot, if needs be.

If even that fails, you may have to do a more difficult operation, like powering down the server and accessing its hard disk from another Windows installation, by taking out the hard disk and connecting it to another Windows computer, if necessary.

ERD Commander

Fri, 2009-02-27 10:32 by Gusta

Thanks for the tips, both the keayboard and Network cable did not help. I ended up booting with the ERD Commander with an external hard drive connected. I managed to copy all application data and some files to the external hard drive. I will use the weekend to format the server and do reinstallation. This time I will also make sure the IRPStackSize is correctly configured in the registry before installing Windows Server Service Pack 2003 Pack 2.

May not be necessary

Fri, 2009-02-27 16:13 by admin

You can change the registry of an inaccessible Windows installation by accessing the hard disk from another Windows installation.

To do this, fire up regedit.exe and load the entire hive from the non-booting installation, probably the SYSTEM hive, into HKEY_USERS, then change and resave it, but not before making a backup copy of the hive.

ATTSupportPlusTech's picture

Blasted! Norton Anti-Virus 2009

Mon, 2009-01-26 18:13 by ATTSupportPlusTech

I had a call from a user today having this exact issue. I noticed the entry was not in the registry and I thought I was in for a quick fix once I read the solution. I added the registry entry and experimented with different values and still nothing. After banging my head on the desk for about 15 mins. I figured if all else fails blame Norton. I did an uninstall of Norton Anti-Virus 2009 with the Norton Product Removal Tool.... and like magic, all of the mappings were working again with no issue.

I recommend for those who aren’t having success with the registry fix alone to try to uninstall the protection software as a troubleshooting step... worked for me. The user is now happy with AVG and everything is working as intended!

Thanks for this interesting report

Mon, 2009-01-26 18:19 by admin

It's kind of frightening, but then I've recommended against all things Norton for years.

You did reboot after each registry change, or didn't you? That would also explain it, as a changed IRPStackSize value becomes effective only after a reboot (or a restart of the server service).

ATTSupportPlusTech's picture

Service restart

Mon, 2009-01-26 18:30 by ATTSupportPlusTech

I was staring and stopping the Server service and subsequently the computer browser service after each value change. I figured that may be enough. Would you recommend a reboot after altering the entry value?

Server service

Mon, 2009-01-26 21:22 by admin

Restarting the server service should be enough.

Restarting the computer browser service certainly cannot hurt either. The latter is one of the highly unreliable services anyway.

Another Happy Geek

Mon, 2009-01-26 00:34 by jasshep

The IRPStackSize entry was completely missing. I added it with a value of 16 and restarted the Server service. BTW I also had to restart the Computer Browser service as this is stopped when the Server service is stopped. Whoppee works a treat.

I am running Acronis TrueImage V10 and have been for over a year. Dunno why this should suddenly happen now. My last install was Ad-AwareAE free.May this could be added to the culprit list.

Anyway great tip, helped me no end, thanks very much.

not enough server storage is available to process this command

Sat, 2009-01-24 22:48 by ehschmuhl

I'm another very happy reader of this item. I am setting up a new PC and had the network drive access problem. I have both Norton IS and Acronis TrueImage on the system, so I don't know which one is the likely culprit.

On my system (XP, SP3) setting IRPStackSize (which I had to add) to 15 didn't work, but 16 did.

Many thanks for the great tip.

Thanks for reporting the values

Sun, 2009-01-25 11:22 by admin

Thanks to everybody who reported the value that worked or didn't work. We're closing in on the most successful values of 16 and 18 with a few users reporting higher required values.

I wonder if anybody even tried 17. (:-)

What is the harm in making the IRPStackSize big?

Sun, 2009-01-11 03:14 by YaLearnSomthinNew

I've been farting around trying to fix this problem for months. I stumbled upon your website and like others, I had already tried the setting of 15, based on something I read months ago, to no avail. I wasn't expecting much but I read through all the posts and found that 18 appears to be the minimum number that worked for everyone, so I went straight to 18 and Voila, it worked! I couldn't believe it. Thank you very much.

But my question is, why are we supposed to sneak up on the lowest number that works? Why not set it to 20 or 25 or higher, right to begin with?

btw, I don't have Norton (hate it) but I do have Acronis True Image 11 Home (love it!). I don't know if when I upgraded to version 11 (from version 9) is when my problem began, but I know for sure it was still working when I had version 9.

Thanks again!


Tue, 2009-04-07 08:35 by Arne Offenberg

In the old DOS days we used Stacks in Config.sys. This where probably the same. The default was Stacks=9,128. Which ment a number of 9 and 128 bytes. This was supporting the dynamic use of data stacks to handle hardware interrupts. And as I seem to remember, was taken from a small block of system memory in the first range of the 640k. This was the reason for not using too much of this.

Thanks to all for help. It almost solved my problem. I still have one more. An old portable with Win-98 now ask me for password when I try to connect to my other two XPs, or to my printers. Nothing I can think of help.
Regards Arne Offenberg

Good old days

Tue, 2009-04-07 13:42 by admin

Yes, I remember those all too well. (:-)

Today this web site doesn't support Windows 98 any more, and I can't think of any solution either. When you enter a correct password, does it work?

Very good question

Sun, 2009-01-11 10:56 by admin

Actually a pretty obvious question when we're dealing with tuning a system parameter, but, true to form, nobody can answer it. Microsoft's Knowledge Base has nothing to say about the cost, apart from mentioning 36 bytes per something not clearly defined (see below), which doesn't seem very significant.

I don't know the answer either. I just assumed that if the default value is 15 and not 50 or 999, then at least the programmer who wrote this must have believed that there is a significant cost to setting it higher.

On the other hand you are right, 18 isn't much higher than 15, and we can hope that its additional cost is low and that the programmer was mistaken or trapped in a 1980, 16 KB memory, mindset.

The Microsoft Knowledge Base says this in article no. 285089:

The IRPStackSize parameter specifies the number of stack locations in I/O request packets (IRPs) that are used by Windows 2000 Server, by Windows Server 2003, and by Windows XP. You may have to increase this number for certain transports, for media access control (MAC) drivers, or for file system drivers. Each stack uses 36 bytes of memory for each receive buffer. This value is set in the following registry subkey:

The default value of the IRPStackSize parameter is 15. The range is from 11 (0xb hexadecimal) through 50 (0x32 hexadecimal).

To me this sounds as if the cost is 32 bytes of memory for each increase of 1 plus perhaps a little additonal processing cost. If that is all, then the question is, why did they not fix it at 50 and be done with it, or make it auto-tuning, rather than inventing a whole much more expensive (in programming time) mechanism to control this value through the registry? Even 10 years ago a couple of hundred bytes didn't really matter much.

In contrast, the total cost of the defect we are now fighting is likely an eight-digit dollar number (yes, that's upwards of $10 billion), assuming that 1% of all Windows computers are afflicted and incur a double-digit dollar cost each.


Fri, 2009-01-09 01:59 by alfred

thanks for the fix, I too had just installed that TrueImage piece of crap, and had no idea my problem was related. Gotta love google and

I tried 15 and 16 and nothing, so I jumped to 18 and everything's cool.

16 works for me!

Thu, 2009-01-08 14:48 by kasssa

16 worked, so I didn't try any other values.

Sharing used to work on my machine, but seemed to stop after I installed Norton Internet Security 2007. Maybe some connection, maybe not. May try some experimenting on my other machines to see if installing NIS2007 changes the registry key.

Thanks a lot for posting this fix!!! Very much appreciated.

"Information is best when shared!"

16 works for me

Sun, 2008-12-28 22:38 by cabele

I also have TrueImage home installed, and I never would have guessed that it was the cause of my network problem.

I had no IRPStackSize entry at all, adding it with a value of 16 and restarting the Server service fixed it right up.


15 did not work 18 did

Wed, 2008-12-17 06:02 by Fireant

Stacksize had to be increased to 18 here.
I too have trueimage.

I have 3 machines ... after increasing the stack size to 18 at first only the vista machine would talk to the XP desktop that is the troublemaker.
The laptop (also XP) would not talk to the trouble machine at first .. but I went to the toilet and when I came back I tried again and it worked that time without me doing anything.
Weird ... eh ?

I notice with lan stuff you have to do a lot of rebooting and a lot of waiting ... if at first it does not work ...just wait a few mins ....

savojr's picture

15 did not work 18 did

Mon, 2009-02-02 18:01 by savojr

"Stacksize had to be increased to 18 here. I too have trueimage."

-Exact same situation here. =)

BTW. I registered to site just to say thanks for fix!

TrueImage needs 18

Mon, 2009-02-02 19:44 by admin

TrueImage seems to need an IRPStackSize of 18 then. Wish the makers of that program knew and would set the value automatically. But no, that would make it too easy. (:-)

16 & TrueImage work for me.

Tue, 2009-09-22 14:17 by teedee

First go. Did not need 18. There must be some other issue interacting too.

So no easy rule

Tue, 2009-09-22 15:19 by admin

Thanks for reporting! It remains mysterious and a trial-and-error operation then.

Why doesn't this work?

Wed, 2008-12-03 00:25 by elliphant

Note to self: IRPStackSize must be a DWORD, not a STRING.....



Wed, 2008-12-03 07:02 by admin

Thanks for the reminder! Yes, computing is full of nasty little traps.


Mon, 2008-11-24 20:17 by Dayveboy

This solved my problem first time... thanks

Not Enough Server Storage -set value to 16

Sat, 2008-11-22 21:36 by herterj

WIN XP home, vanilla, value of 16 worked for me! THANK YOU!

Awesome you prevented me from going insane

Sun, 2008-11-16 01:21 by mbmedia

suddenly started getting the "Not enough server storage" error when attempting to access shares on a WinXP box from a Vista box

for me it all went horribly wrong when windows update installed .NET 2.0 framework SP1

added the IRPStackSize with value 16, rebooted, no luck
changed value to 18, rebooted, works a charm!

thank you! thank you! i can access my 2TB share again

props to admin

Thanks for reporting the values

Sun, 2008-11-16 09:30 by admin

I'm still wondering why some installations need IRPStackSize 15, others need 16, and others need 18 or more. This is one of the stranger Windows bugs.

TrueImage is my culprit

Tue, 2008-11-11 01:38 by danielbureau

After installing Acronis TrueImage home 2009 (which I like), I was not able to access my computer. I only realized this fact after reading your post. By first looking at Microsoft, they suggested to put the key larger than 4. Well this is far from enough. It used your recommended 15 and all is fine for me. Now I have to go back at Norton Internet Security and undo settings that I thought were wrong. Well!


Acronis TrueImage 2009 removed IRPStackSize

Sat, 2008-12-27 18:17 by sfroach

Thanks for this article!
I found no IRPStackSize value in the registry. Was able to successfully create via your instructions and now all is well.

Acronis strikes again: Seagate Diskwizard

Thu, 2009-08-13 20:17 by ubehebe

I had just cloned a disk with 60 customized programs, which originally took me like 12 hours to install from scratch. I was in no %$%^^%^&^& mood to redo everything when I started getting the famous "not enough server storage" message. I poked around on the internet, and got here on my third or fourth try.

I had used Seagate Diskwizard to do the disk clone, and it worked perfectly. But guess what? You guessed it ---- Seagate Diskwizard is a crippled version of Acronis True Image, or one of their other products.

I uninstalled Seagate Diskwizard and the problem vanished!!!! Great advice. I don't usually comment on these fixes, but I took the time to sign on here to THANK everyone. This fix saved me COUNTLESS hours.

What is Acronis thinking when they release a product with a bug like this? Bad enough that you buy the program and it ruins your network. WORSE yet that you get a tool from Seagate -- that you expect was tested 45 ways to Sunday -- and it does the same thing. Can you imagine the THOUSANDS maybe MILLIONS of people migrating to a new disk who are affected by this Seagate product wreaking havoc on their network? Just unbelievable!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks again.


Thu, 2009-08-13 21:11 by admin

So we have yet another culprit now. I've added Seagate DiscWizard to the main article at the top to warn other users about it. Very useful comment!

You're welcome

Tue, 2008-11-11 07:43 by admin

Thanks for reporting back. I wonder whether anybody has taken up this issue with Acronis support. If their software breaks normal networking, that's an issue worth some discussion. In fact, I have no clue why they even fiddle with the IRPStackSize.

I consider Norton software generally suspect, because I have seen it cause problems far too often, particularly Norton Internet Security and particularly networking problems. My recommendation is to uninstall it and use something else, if anything else is really needed. Normally a router with NAT plus the built-in Windows firewall is sufficient.

ErichXsv1's picture

changed irpstack parameter. CAN see files now BUT...

Mon, 2008-11-10 13:19 by ErichXsv1

Signed up to cast vote and "Thank you so much for this post!!" I still need a little help though. After changing parameters I can now access all of my network files(yeah, been working 3 days on it) However, video now takes an unusually long time to load, and stutters while its playing. I have tried lots of settings (in increments of 3 up to 50) and even increased local cache to no avail.
My network WAS running fine w/o the irpstack mod before...and no wait when executing video etc..then a few days ago I could see the network, including folders but could not access files..until this change. I feel like I am very close, but I am at a loss right now. ANY help would be hugely appreciated. I would be more than happy to provide any additional info, if needed. Thanking you in advance,

Where does the video come from?

Mon, 2008-11-10 17:03 by admin

Are you talking about watching a video file that comes across the network from another computer?

What's the data rate when you don't watch, but copy the file? Is it high enough?

ErichXsv1's picture

it's actually from my XP pro

Tue, 2008-11-11 06:12 by ErichXsv1

it's actually from my XP pro to an Xbox shared thru smb (xbmc). Xfer is done via FTP and speed is fine, but I like browsing and instantly choosing something instead of moving it over to enjoy it w/o lag. I know it is possible, I have the same setup I used to have. I think the only program added since was roxio back on track. Never encountered a "wait" for anything over network prior to this...

Is it the network?

Tue, 2008-11-11 07:51 by admin

To make sure that this is really a networking problem, can you play the same video locally on the XP computer without any stuttering? Sometimes hard disks fall back to PIO mode, which causes stuttering video problems.

Otherwise I don't have any idea right now. There are so many possible causes … You'll have to keep trying different things. If you have another computer, try to read and copy those files to measure the speed and to check whether it is a problem of the XP computer or only of the XBox.

Are you sure the XBox uses ftp? That would be a different can of worms. I would think they use SMB, i.e. normal Windows networking. But I don't know offhand.

ErichXsv1's picture

Seems as tho XP machine is to blame

Tue, 2008-11-11 20:18 by ErichXsv1

Video is perfect ON server. Stutters on both the xbox and other xp pro on network...this issue is with SMB.


ON Network -even accessing the shares takes longer than it did(sometimes upwards of a minute to load the avi file)- I assume some sort of buffering, however it never did that before. Is there a way to CLEAR the memory associated with the irpstack.

Read and copy=No is slightly defunct, but the more intensive stuff like videos really stutter.
PS thanks for the'd be surprised how many forums nobody responds...perhaps I have been phrasing my issue ineffectively. Anyway-Thanks

Suspect other issue

Tue, 2008-11-11 22:06 by admin

I have doubts that this is still an IRPStackSize issue. I suspect it is something else.

Unfortunately there are many possible causes, even down to a bad contact in the network cable.

A simple test would be to copy a large file across the network to check the speed. A 100Base-TX Ethernet should transport around 10 MB/s, if it is working perfectly well, so a 1 GB file should copy in about 100 s on a perfect network. If it took longer than 5 min, I would call that a defect.

ErichXsv1's picture

If 1GB over 5mins is a defect- I am defunct! 900mb ~20mins

Wed, 2008-11-12 01:59 by ErichXsv1

Network cable ruled out, as the box I did txfer test to is wireless 54g (although the Xbox IS ethernet connected) I agree with you about the irpstack. I know very little about all this..I had never even heard of IRPStackSize prior to this-but it did allow me to access my network shares again so I can't help but think they may be connected somehow.
--***Tried copying over 900MB file and it has taken 13mins already(still says 5 to go).
BTW-I have athlon 64 X2 Dual, 2.6 ghz w, 1.75gb RAM- and 2x500GB seagate sata- Raid 0-as the main/server===router===Xbox and
--------------------wireless desktop athlon 2.4ghz, 2gb Ram- 80GB IDE
I also tried system restore, back as far as I could(as I haven't always had this issue) and also did the xp install repair----also didn't help. I am almost ready reformat. Aargh. I have has very little luck finding any solves for anything like this, either through Google or various forums. Please do forward ANY suggestions as a reformat would be a headache-especially because I would have more data than I have room for....
Thanks again in advance.
PS-after the txsfer I could play that 900mb share on the xbox(from the wireless desktop) with NO skipping. Perfect-Definitely an issue on the XP pro main/server

Swap components

Wed, 2008-11-12 07:00 by admin

Too many possible causes, unfortunately. Wireless is much slower than Ethernet cable, that's normal, and video over wireless has always been a bit problematic, but should work, if everything is set up correctly and working well.

I would try to remove and reinstall the Ethernet adapter driver. Then I would try a different Ethernet adapter. If yours is on the motherboard, try to borrow a plug-in Ethernet adapter. You could take your computer to a computer shop and ask them to check the Ethernet speed.

I would also check the cabling and the switch, if there is one. Are they all up to the speed?

ErichXsv1's picture

I understand that wireless is

Wed, 2008-11-12 23:35 by ErichXsv1

I understand that wireless is slower, however, once the video has been txferred from the prob comp to the wireless xp-it streams to the xbox with little or no wait, and the video has yet to skip! I will try reinstalling the ethernet driver and post the results.
This started after installing Roxio back on track 10-as this seems to be a similar program to trueimage I thought it would have a similar fix.
Thanks for working w/ me on this.
**updated network adapter driver==Still no change***
***uninstalled all Roxio components with ccleaner***====still no change

My Results

Tue, 2008-10-07 01:23 by Matt.Werner


Through trial and error I determined that a setting of 16 (decimal) or higher worked for me. Restarted the Server service after each trial modification to the registry setting. Note that setting back to 15 always results in the error returning.

Two excellent hints

Tue, 2008-10-07 07:38 by admin

Thanks for these two valuable pieces of information, namely that 15 was not enough, but 16 was, and the confirmation that the server service needed to be restarted.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.