Regarding the Virtual Memory comments in this post;

nw my total paging size for all drives is 744mb

What do you man "_for all drives_"?

When you're in the Virtual Memory settings, this is found at the bottom of that "window".


You only need one PF.

In essence, true. However a degree of performance can be obtained by using a second hard disk (if you have one) for your "working" page file. (I know that you know this and practice it Bill.) A page file should be left on the O/S drive for memory dump purposes. It can be set to system managed (which is the 1.5 min/3.0 max times RAM). (See below *) If you have only one hard disk, the page file is best left alone (other than setting a 1GB max if you have the disk space).

I have three page files. One on the O/S drive, and one in the root (first) partition of my two other hard disks. (I have eight partitions across three hard disks.)


(Re; Page file on) at least a secondary partition)

Placing your paging file on another partition on the same hard disk (O/S) brings no performance gains.


* "Moving the paging file to a separate physical Harddrive (not partition) from the boot partition will increase paging file performance. However, if you remove the paging file from the boot partition, Windows cannot create a dump file (Memory.dmp) in which to write debugging information in the event that a kernel mode Stop Error message occurs. The optimal solution is to create one paging file that is stored on the boot partition, and then create a second paging file on a separate physical Harddrive (not partition) Windows will use the paging file on the less frequently used partition over the paging file on the heavily used boot partition. Windows uses an internal algorithm to determine which paging file to use for virtual memory management."

Information sources:
http://home.comcast.net/~SupportCD/OptimizeXP.html
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=197379
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;555223
http://members.shaw.ca/bsanders/Wind...ageFileEtc.htm

There are probably as many viewpoints on this subject as there are experts. I will note the following and leave it at that.

In the comcast link, it says in their bold,

Virtual Memory is always in use, even when the memory required by all running processes does not exceed the amount of RAM installed on the system

As I have noted before, if not earlier in this thread, then elsewhere in other threads, if XP sees memory, it will take and use it, even if it is not the fastest memory it has access to. Therefore, as noted in the comcast link, if you create a Page File on a slowww hard disk, it will use it. If you create multiple page files, XP will use, and be forced to manage, multiple page files. That's wasting disk space and CPU cycles.

In the second link, you left out important information. Note where it says,

However, placing the paging filefile on the boot partition does not optimize performance because Windows has to perform disk I/O on both the system directory and the paging file. Therefore, it is recommended that you place the paging file on a different partition and different physical hard disk drive so that Windows can handle multiple I/O requests more quickly.

Yes, it goes on to say,

Not having this crash dump file could lead to extended server downtime should the STOP require a debug to be performed.

But who cares??? My XP machine is not a server. My system is not crashing. I don't need any dump files and I certainly don't want debugging turned on. And if I did, I could always create another PF file on C Drive temporarily for testing.

The third reference actually uses the 4th reference as its source.

And the 4th reference from shaw.ca actually supports my position, thank you , when it says,

If the system is paging heavily and the pagefile is heavily fragmented, consider moving the pagefile to a newly formatted partition on a separate disk.

It also states a dump (the only reason to have a PF on the boot drive) is rarely needed because ...

Operating systems such as Windows XP, Windows 2000 and Windows 2003 rarely crash

and goes on to say,

it is usually a relatively simple matter to reconfigure the pagefile for this specific instance.

So I maintain my position, if you have more than one hard drive, maintain only 1 page file and put it on the secondary drive, that is, the "non-boot" drive.

If you have a server that requires constant monitoring and debugging, or if you start having system events that do not appear in Event Viewer, and you know how to debug and read dump files, then go back in and create a small temporary PF on the boot drive for troubleshooting purposes.

I do agree that putting the PF on a secondary "partition" of a single drive does not yield the performance gains that are seen with the two drive read/write heads of separate drives. But putting the partition on a second drive is still a good idea because that eliminates any possibility PF expansion/contraction affecting fragmentation on the boot drive.

In the comcast link, it says in their *bold*, *Virtual Memory is always in use, even when the memory required by all running processes does not exceed the amount of RAM installed on the system

???? This is a given and well known fact (to anyone who undertakes understanding and adjusting Virtual Memory to optimize system performance). I have no dispute.

If you create multiple page files, XP will use, and be forced to manage, multiple page files. That's wasting disk space and CPU cycles.

This is incorrect. "Windows will use the paging file on the less frequently used partition over the paging file on the heavily used boot partition. Windows uses an internal algorithm to determine which page file to use for virtual memory management. In the above scenario, the following goals of the page file would be served:
• The system will be properly configured to capture a Memory.dmp file should the computer experience a kernel mode STOP error.
• The page file on the less frequently used partition will be used the majority of the time because it is not on a busy partition.

Another advantage of using a paging file on its own partition is that the paging file will not become fragmented. If the paging file is on a partition with other data, the paging file might experience fragmentation as it expands to satisfy the extra virtual memory required. A defragmented paging file leads to faster virtual memory access and improves the chances of capturing a dump file without significant errors."
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=197379


Not having this crash dump file could lead to extended server downtime should the STOP require a debug to be performed. But who cares??? My XP machine is not a _server_.

I was quite aware that the MSKB article was directed at server based machines. Most system troubles outlined on these boards are not servers either. We've both (I believe) seen other Moderators here ask for these dump files. Having that dump file improves troubleshooting system problems by the people helping posters.


My system is not crashing. I don't need any dump files and I certainly don't want debugging turned on. And if I did, I could always create another PF file on C Drive temporarily for testing.

??? Well, yes, you could. This is your personal standpoint/choice.


... states a dump (the only reason to have a PF on the boot drive) is rarely needed because ...Operating systems such as Windows XP, Windows 2000 and Windows 2003 rarely crash ...

I guess this is why we rarely see posts regarding system crashes (in these respective forums).


But putting the partition on a second drive is still ...

I gather you meant "page file".

I guess this is why we rarely see posts regarding system crashes (in these respective forums.

Sarcasm is not necessary. Tire shops are full of flat tires. That does not mean every tire will get a flat before it wears out. Most tires do not. And certainly, the vast majority of crashes seen here are NOT cause by virtual memory errors. STOP errors for other systems can still be recorded in Event Viewer.

I said,

"If you create multiple page files, XP will use, and be forced to manage, multiple page files."

The reply was,

"That is incorrect"

But then went on to say,

"Windows uses an internal algorithm to determine which page file to use for virtual memory management."

I don't see a difference between "uses an internal algorithm to determine which page file to use..." and "manage"?

If there is only one PF, no clock cycles will be wasted on management or algorithms of multiple PFs.

I'm not going to argue here. As I said when I came in, I was expressing my viewpoint, just one of many.

Obviously, Rohan, there is conflicting data on the topic. You have my opinion and supporting facts.

The bottom line is most people do not need debugging dumps running for all drives all the time. IF one is needed for maintenance or troubleshooting (or server statistics/monitoring), it can easily be reconfigured/enabled as needed, then reconfigured back when done. That said, if you have lots of free disk space, and don't mind the small overhead needed to run the algorithms, it does not hurt to have PFs on multiple drives. But IMO, only one, properly configured PF on a secondary drive, is all you need.

Rohan,
Sorry for the interuption to this thread.

Sarcasm is not necessary.

It wasn't sarcasm at all Bill. (Didn't you notice the at the end?)


I said,"If you create multiple page files, XP will use, and be forced to manage, multiple page files."

I read your statement in essence as "XP will use/manage multiple page files,".

My point was only one is "running/utilized", once Windows determines which one to run/utilize. That's all.
The couple of clock cycles is (I feel) barely negligible. Especially in todays Giga-Hertz machines.

We both support the use of a page file in the first partition of a second hard disk (preferably on the opposite buss/channel/controller).

My only other points were it should be on a seperate hard disk, and not on another partition on the same disk. I felt this should be clarified.

And the act of leaving a small system managed page file for dumps can be a handy thing to have. You seemed to have differed in opinion. Fine.

However, now you state: That said, if you have lots of free disk space, and don't mind the small overhead needed to run the algorithms, it does not _hurt_ to have PFs on multiple drives. But _IMO_, only one, properly configured PF on a secondary drive, is all you need.

Which seems to (now) bring us into agreement (not of the same opinion, but general agreement). I'm not going to argue here either. I simply want things clear to people reading these forum postings.

"The bottom line" is really what people decide to do, based upon what they learn from the facts presented. Different opinions have been expressed (and I hope clarified), and document links which describe how these related elements work have been provided.

Sorry for the delay rohan. I was reviewing posts and noticed that you had one last question;

"i had changed my power setting to user setting. when i changed that to full power i saw that i m able to play video on my system smoothly. but when i change it to low power or user setting, i can't play my videos smoothly. can u tell me the reason for this???"

By changing your power settings in the bios, you are in effect changing your machines performance elements. CPU dedication, etc. Since .avi files are (generally) larger (KB or MB) than say MPEG, MPG, etc files, your system has to work a bit harder to "keep up". As you have only 495 MB of RAM;

Total Memory Deteced in Hardware: ~512 MB
Memory Reported to Operating System: 495MB

the hesitation in viewing these files was reflected in some of the data being swapped out to the page file as you were on a "reduced" (CPU etc) performance level.


This thread has been resolved and locked to prevent other users from hijacking the thread and to help others know which threads have been resolved and which are still being worked on.

If you started this thread and the problem returns, or, the case has not been properly resolved, please send a Private Message to a Moderator to have the thread opened again. If you have a different problem, please start a new thread in the appropriate forum.