Page File in XP Pro

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Use.Netuser.de, Jul 1, 2003.

  1. 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
     
    Use.Netuser.de, Jul 1, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Use.Netuser.de

    derek / nul Guest

    Not without getting errors.

    On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 12:02:27 +0100, "Use.Netuser.de" <>
    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
     
    derek / nul, Jul 1, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Use.Netuser.de

    Ionizer Guest

    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" <> wrote in message
    news:bdrpo7$ve53h$...
    > 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
    >
    >
     
    Ionizer, Jul 1, 2003
    #3
  4. Use.Netuser.de

    Ron Martell Guest

    "Use.Netuser.de" <> 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."
     
    Ron Martell, Jul 1, 2003
    #4
  5. Use.Netuser.de

    ooyah Guest

    "Ionizer" <> wrote in message
    news:bdsabv$10cdpe$...
    > 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" <> wrote in message
    > news:bdrpo7$ve53h$...
    > > 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
     
    ooyah, Jul 1, 2003
    #5
  6. Use.Netuser.de

    Brian H¹© Guest

    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" <> 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
     
    Brian H¹©, Jul 1, 2003
    #6
  7. Use.Netuser.de

    rifleman Guest

    In news:,
    derek / nul <> 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" <> 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
     
    rifleman, Jul 1, 2003
    #7
  8. Use.Netuser.de

    derek / nul Guest

    On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:00:05 +0100, "rifleman" <> wrote:

    >In news:,
    >derek / nul <> 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" <> 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
     
    derek / nul, Jul 1, 2003
    #8
  9. Use.Netuser.de

    ooyah Guest

    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.aspx?scid=kb;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" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > 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" <> 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
    > >

    >
     
    ooyah, Jul 1, 2003
    #9
  10. Use.Netuser.de

    derek / nul Guest

    On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:48:42 +0100, "ooyah" <> 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.
     
    derek / nul, Jul 1, 2003
    #10
  11. Use.Netuser.de

    ooyah Guest

    in my experience optimal & recommended are 2 different things btw

    yep granted the 2 x system memory figure was a bit precise but still within
    the boundaries ( 1.5 min to 3x 1.5 max ) of the technet article - i should
    have elaborated then really - setting the optimal pagefile size is a tricky
    thing to get right and only experimenting and using performance monitoring
    will achieve the best results ( i know from first hand experience ) - in
    work we use video & 3d editing software which is extremely memory intensive
    and after exhaustive tests use a 3 x ( 2 x 1.5 min ) system memory page file
    minimum & maximum setting - the same size minimum and maximum so the virtual
    memory does not have to readjust the amount continual ( page ) - these
    settings are contrary to what any of us have mention, but the best for our
    developers/designers/editors in work

    keep the minimum size 1.5 x system memory yes, do not lower it

    hope the articles are of help ( and less than a year old articles at
    that! ) - the moving of the pagefile on a different drive can be a bit of a
    luxury for the normal home user, most of us though should be able to muster
    another partition from somewhere though

    regards


    "derek / nul" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:48:42 +0100, "ooyah" <> 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.

    >
     
    ooyah, Jul 1, 2003
    #11
  12. Use.Netuser.de

    derek / nul Guest

    On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 21:58:40 +0100, "ooyah" <> wrote:

    >in my experience optimal & recommended are 2 different things btw


    in mine too, but our experience is only relevant to our machines.

    >yep granted the 2 x system memory figure was a bit precise but still within
    >the boundaries ( 1.5 min to 3x 1.5 max ) of the technet article


    Unfortunately the technet article is rooted in win3.1, that's when the 1.5 to 3x
    first started. In those days nobody had enough ram.

    Today (nearly) everybody has too much ram, so the page file size is far less
    important.

    > - i should
    >have elaborated then really - setting the optimal pagefile size is a tricky
    >thing to get right and only experimenting and using performance monitoring
    >will achieve the best results ( i know from first hand experience ) - in
    >work we use video & 3d editing software which is extremely memory intensive
    >and after exhaustive tests use a 3 x ( 2 x 1.5 min ) system memory page file
    >minimum & maximum setting - the same size minimum and maximum so the virtual
    >memory does not have to readjust the amount continual ( page ) - these
    >settings are contrary to what any of us have mention, but the best for our
    >developers/designers/editors in work


    That is fine for working machines, but does not bear much relevance to the
    average home machine.

    >keep the minimum size 1.5 x system memory yes, do not lower it


    Good idea if you want to set and forget, which is more than most people do.

    >hope the articles are of help ( and less than a year old articles at
    >that! ) - the moving of the pagefile on a different drive can be a bit of a
    >luxury for the normal home user, most of us though should be able to muster
    >another partition from somewhere though


    I run mine on another drive, I also run it at ram +12Mb

    In the long run, the average machine has only one drive and a windows set page
    file.

    >"derek / nul" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:48:42 +0100, "ooyah" <> 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.

    >>

    >
     
    derek / nul, Jul 2, 2003
    #12
  13. Use.Netuser.de

    ooyah Guest

    as stated, all depends on the type of applications running at the end of the
    day - no specifics necessary - just follow the general guidelines in the
    articles for general use

    if more specifics are provided ( i.e. detailed specs and types of apps )
    then a more detailed answer can be provided

    but the original poster has done the deed so i suppose thats it

    enjoyed it

    regards


    "derek / nul" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 21:58:40 +0100, "ooyah" <> wrote:
    >
    > >in my experience optimal & recommended are 2 different things btw

    >
    > in mine too, but our experience is only relevant to our machines.
    >
    > >yep granted the 2 x system memory figure was a bit precise but still

    within
    > >the boundaries ( 1.5 min to 3x 1.5 max ) of the technet article

    >
    > Unfortunately the technet article is rooted in win3.1, that's when the 1.5

    to 3x
    > first started. In those days nobody had enough ram.
    >
    > Today (nearly) everybody has too much ram, so the page file size is far

    less
    > important.
    >
    > > - i should
    > >have elaborated then really - setting the optimal pagefile size is a

    tricky
    > >thing to get right and only experimenting and using performance

    monitoring
    > >will achieve the best results ( i know from first hand experience ) - in
    > >work we use video & 3d editing software which is extremely memory

    intensive
    > >and after exhaustive tests use a 3 x ( 2 x 1.5 min ) system memory page

    file
    > >minimum & maximum setting - the same size minimum and maximum so the

    virtual
    > >memory does not have to readjust the amount continual ( page ) - these
    > >settings are contrary to what any of us have mention, but the best for

    our
    > >developers/designers/editors in work

    >
    > That is fine for working machines, but does not bear much relevance to the
    > average home machine.
    >
    > >keep the minimum size 1.5 x system memory yes, do not lower it

    >
    > Good idea if you want to set and forget, which is more than most people

    do.
    >
    > >hope the articles are of help ( and less than a year old articles at
    > >that! ) - the moving of the pagefile on a different drive can be a bit of

    a
    > >luxury for the normal home user, most of us though should be able to

    muster
    > >another partition from somewhere though

    >
    > I run mine on another drive, I also run it at ram +12Mb
    >
    > In the long run, the average machine has only one drive and a windows set

    page
    > file.
    >
    > >"derek / nul" <> wrote in message
    > >news:...
    > >> On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:48:42 +0100, "ooyah" <> 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.
    > >>

    > >

    >
     
    ooyah, Jul 2, 2003
    #13
  14. Use.Netuser.de

    UKALUM85 Guest

    And also Windows will allocate and reserve that space for the page file, if
    I remember correctly.

    "Ron Martell" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Use.Netuser.de" <> 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."
     
    UKALUM85, Jul 2, 2003
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. News Reader
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    627
    News Reader
    May 12, 2004
  2. News Reader
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    538
    News Reader
    May 16, 2004
  3. Harry the Horse

    Web page has altered my home page in IE 5.5

    Harry the Horse, Jul 10, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    583
    sethra
    Jul 11, 2003
  4. Route 9w
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    724
  5. Phil
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    1,206
    Wyatt M. Portendt
    Mar 4, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page