Paging File (Win2K)

[dclee012]

I've never quite figured out a good paging file size.

On machines with larger amounts of RAM (1GB-2GB), what's a reasonable paging file size? How come some people turn it completely off? What kind of difference does it make to have or not have?

Thanks

[Temetka]

I wouldn't turn off the page file. However I would set it at RAM + 512MB. So in your case a max size of 2.5GB and a min size of 1GB should work just fine.

[pianowizard]

Some people have reported that turning off the paging file forces the computer to use the physical memory exclusively, thus speeding things up. I tried it last night, but when I started Photoshop, I got a warning saying that it's very dangerous to run the program without virtual memory. So, I chickened and re-enabled the paging file. Now I have 1.5GB RAM plus 512MB virtual memory on my T60. Let's see if that's enough.

[RealBlackStuff]

If you are running XP, let XP decide how much space your PC needs.
I've never found any reasonable arguments for OR against anybody else's theory.
The maximum pagefile size is 4GB. On my PC with 2GB memory, my pagefile is effectively 805MB (managed by XP)

[pianowizard]

If you are running XP, let XP decide how much space your PC needs.

Some say that letting XP decide slows down the machine because this "decision" takes time.

[leoblob]

The OP is running WIN2K. I've read a bit on this (WIN2K paging file), and I have yet to see any convincing reason(s) to deviate from the default settings.

[bill bolton]

Some say that letting XP decide slows down the machine because this "decision" takes time.

That is a strongly held belief of "some", rather than anything for which there is hard evidence.

Cheers,

Bill

[Bob34]

Some say that letting XP decide slows down the machine because this "decision" takes time.

That is a strongly held belief of "some", rather than anything for which there is hard evidence.

Cheers,

Bill

Though if the Page File is Pre-allocated wouldn't that mean it could be assigned a contiguous space (third-party Disk Fragmenters to the rescue)? IE, it wouldn't be in fragmented across the disk and thus would speed up I/O processes.

*shrug*

[ashleys]

Unless you've got some very memory hungry applications and are short on RAM the default is fine (in both W2K and XP).

To get a true idea of your pagefile requirements you need to use something like task manager to get an idea of your overall memory usage.
The Perfomance Tab has the general big picture numbers. For a more detailed view, go to the processes tab and then select View and add in some extra columns like Page Faults delta and Virtual Memory size.

I've run with both tailored pagefile sizes and the default. The only advantage with the tailored size is if you're very short of disk space and the default is too large.

The only possible performance degradation on the pagefile when letting Windows decide is if it secondary extends. In this case the benefits of block paging can be negated as Windows is unable to write the pages to contiguous slots.

[WPWoodJr]

To see how much paging file you are using, do Start...Run...perfmon

Then, press the little notepad icon or press CTRL-R to get into textual "Report" mode. Then press the + button (or CTRL-I) and add the Performance Object "Paging File", Counters "%Usage" and "%Usage Peak".

Now, run a bunch of programs and watch these two counters. On my 2GB system with 2GB (XP managed) page file, it never used more than 25% or so of my page file. So, I decreased the size to 1GB with 4GB maximum. That way I get extra disk space back but XP can temporarily increase the size if necessary. It hasn't been necessary so far (XP tells you when it increases the size).

I imagine these counters exist on W2K too.

[jkahng]

Hello everyone,
i love this forum and my new z61m 9541-5hk(korean version)

i use a dedicated partition and store my pagefile and explorer tempfiles. i have another partiton for downloads and data.

i use a fixed 2gig page file along with my 1.5gig physical mem(windows xp 32 bit can only handle 4 gigs anyway)

fyi, separating the page file and ie temps will considerably lower your defrag times..... (page file is big and temp files are small and large in amount)

cheers!
jkahng

[WPWoodJr]

i use a fixed 2gig page file along with my 1.5gig physical mem(windows xp 32 bit can only handle 4 gigs anyway)

I'm sure that a 1GB page file would be more than enough - try looking at the page file counters as documented above.

It's not accurate to say that Windows XP 32 can only handle 4 GB of memory. It's true that XP cannot make use of more than 4 GB of physical memory (unless the /PAE switch is used). It's also true that no individual program can request or use more than 2 GB of memory (unless the /3gb switch and/or the /PAE switch is used). However, when you add up the Mem Usage (the "working set") of all programs running on an XP machine, it can be well in excess of 4 GB. So it is perfectly possible to run several programs that use lots of memory and force the paging file size up to, say, 8 GB. This situation would be very rare however but I have experienced it.

[masterus]

Hello everyone

In my A31 I had 1GB RAM , so I decided to turn off Pagefile.
Becouse I never used programs like Photoshop or anything what requires huge memory so never had any problems.
Now I have only 512MB RAM and turned Pagefile and still have no problems.
Your choice.

Regards