Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > Page File in XP Pro

Reply
Thread Tools

Page File in XP Pro

 
 
Use.Netuser.de
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2003
Just upgraded to 1GB from 512MB memory but now swap file is 1.5GB in size
I prefer Windows to manage the swap file but this is huge.
Anyway to reduce it but still allow XP to manage it?
TIA
--
Electronic Frontier Foundation
http://www.eff.org/
Protecting our digital rights


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
derek / nul
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2003
Not without getting errors.

On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 12:02:27 +0100, "Use.Netuser.de" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Just upgraded to 1GB from 512MB memory but now swap file is 1.5GB in size
>I prefer Windows to manage the swap file but this is huge.
>Anyway to reduce it but still allow XP to manage it?
>TIA


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Ionizer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2003
From this detailed page: http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm (which I have yet
to thoroughly wrap my head around,)
"...have a high Maximum size - 700 or 800 MB or even more if there is
plenty of disk space. Having this high will do no harm."
Links to a couple of tools to monitor actual swap file usage are also on
that page.

Regards,
Ian.

"Use.Netuser.de" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bdrpo7$ve53h$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Just upgraded to 1GB from 512MB memory but now swap file is 1.5GB in size
> I prefer Windows to manage the swap file but this is huge.
> Anyway to reduce it but still allow XP to manage it?
> TIA
> --
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
> http://www.eff.org/
> Protecting our digital rights
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Martell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2003
"Use.Netuser.de" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Just upgraded to 1GB from 512MB memory but now swap file is 1.5GB in size
>I prefer Windows to manage the swap file but this is huge.
>Anyway to reduce it but still allow XP to manage it?
>TIA


MVP Alex Nichol's article at http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm as
referred to by another post is an excellent resource for understanding
the whys and wherefores of XP memory management.

Basically the default settings for the page file in Windows XP have
not been adjusted to recognize the fact that huge amounts of RAM are
commonplace in today's computers. Therefore these values, which are
based on the much smaller amounts of RAM that computers usually had 3
and 4 years ago, are often not optimal for today's reality.

You can safely enter a vastly lower minimum value for the swap file -
something in the 100 to 200 mb range would probably be appropriate -
but leave the maximum size at 1.5 gb.

Windows XP will mananage the page file within the specified
constraints, and it is highly unlikely that the actual size of the
pagefile.sys file will get much larger than the minimum you specified.
However the potential to increase the size, as and when needed, will
allow the memory management to function at maximum efficiency.

Good luck


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."
 
Reply With Quote
 
ooyah
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2003
"Ionizer" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bdsabv$10cdpe$(E-Mail Removed)...
> From this detailed page: http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm (which I have

yet
> to thoroughly wrap my head around,)
> "...have a high Maximum size - 700 or 800 MB or even more if there is
> plenty of disk space. Having this high will do no harm."
> Links to a couple of tools to monitor actual swap file usage are also on
> that page.
>
> Regards,
> Ian.
>
> "Use.Netuser.de" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:bdrpo7$ve53h$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Just upgraded to 1GB from 512MB memory but now swap file is 1.5GB in

size
> > I prefer Windows to manage the swap file but this is huge.
> > Anyway to reduce it but still allow XP to manage it?
> > TIA
> > --
> > Electronic Frontier Foundation
> > http://www.eff.org/
> > Protecting our digital rights
> >
> >


hello

your page file should be double your system memory for optimal performance -
also keep the page file on a different partition, ideally on its own
partition on its own drive if possible

regards


 
Reply With Quote
 
Brian H¹©
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2003
X-No-Archive: Yes
Errrrr...erm... derek / nul said:

> That is the biggest load of rubbish I have heard for today.
>
> It may have been so 2 years ago.


Maybe you should read up a bit more then, as for W2K and XP it is recommended
that the pagefile be on a partition or drive other than where the OS is. (or
words to that effect)

>
> On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:45:51 +0100, "ooyah" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> hello
>>
>> your page file should be double your system memory for optimal performance -
>> also keep the page file on a different partition, ideally on its own
>> partition on its own drive if possible
>>
>> regards




 
Reply With Quote
 
rifleman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2003
In news:(E-Mail Removed),
derek / nul <(E-Mail Removed)> contemplated the little bit of fluff in
his/her navel and typed:
> That is the biggest load of rubbish I have heard for today.
>
> It may have been so 2 years ago.
>
> On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:45:51 +0100, "ooyah" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> hello
>>
>> your page file should be double your system memory for optimal
>> performance - also keep the page file on a different partition,
>> ideally on its own partition on its own drive if possible
>>
>> regards


Help and Support in XP says that optimally, page file should be 1.5 times
max ram.

--
(I may be wrong...I usually am....)
Google is your Friend
Email address deliberately false to avoid spam:
www.gbpcomputing.co.uk



 
Reply With Quote
 
derek / nul
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2003
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:00:05 +0100, "rifleman" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>In news:(E-Mail Removed),
>derek / nul <(E-Mail Removed)> contemplated the little bit of fluff in
>his/her navel and typed:
>> That is the biggest load of rubbish I have heard for today.
>>
>> It may have been so 2 years ago.
>>
>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:45:51 +0100, "ooyah" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> hello
>>>
>>> your page file should be double your system memory for optimal
>>> performance - also keep the page file on a different partition,
>>> ideally on its own partition on its own drive if possible
>>>
>>> regards

>
>Help and Support in XP says that optimally, page file should be 1.5 times
>max ram.


It needs to be ram + 12Mb to stop error messages
 
Reply With Quote
 
ooyah
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2003
as stated by a previous reader, read the following microsoft windows xp
articles:-

from http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=307886 :-

quote:-

"The paging file is the area on the hard disk that Windows uses as if it
were random access memory (RAM) This is sometimes known as "virtual memory."
By default, Windows stores this file on the same partition as the Windows
system files. You can increase the performance of Windows, and increase free
space on the boot partition, by moving this file to a different partition."


http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;EN-US;308417 :-

quote:-

"To have Windows choose the best paging file size, click System managed
size. The recommended minimum size is equivalent to 1.5 times the amount of
RAM on your system, and 3 times that figure for the maximum size. Example,
if you have 256 MB of RAM, the minimum size would be 384, the maximum size
would be 1152.

The recommended size is equivalent to 1.5 times the amount of RAM on your
system. Usually, you should leave the paging file at its recommended size,
although you might increase its size if you routinely use programs that
require a lot of memory."


not really "the biggest load of rubbish I have heard for today" was it

regards

"derek / nul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> That is the biggest load of rubbish I have heard for today.
>
> It may have been so 2 years ago.
>
> On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:45:51 +0100, "ooyah" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >hello
> >
> >your page file should be double your system memory for optimal

performance -
> >also keep the page file on a different partition, ideally on its own
> >partition on its own drive if possible
> >
> >regards
> >

>



 
Reply With Quote
 
derek / nul
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2003
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:48:42 +0100, "ooyah" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> >your page file should be double your system memory for optimal

>performance -


>> That is the biggest load of rubbish I have heard for today.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Win2k Pro vs. WinXP Pro nameruse Computer Support 13 08-04-2004 08:21 AM
Laptop WinXP pro - Linksys WCG200 - PC Win2k pro Tim Fickes Wireless Networking 2 07-29-2004 10:33 PM
Exporting Favorites from one PC to another - XP Pro to XP Pro Treb Computer Support 1 11-29-2003 07:13 AM
Upgrade XP Home to XP Pro from Full XP Pro cd? V Computer Support 3 10-08-2003 07:27 AM



Advertisments