# Putting Paging file on it's own partition



## CjStaal (Aug 10, 2006)

If you put the Paging file on it's own partition, EVEN ON THE SAME HDD it will dramatically improve performance. Just make the Paging File partition 4.01Gb and FAT32 and make the min and max space 4Gb and that way it won't fragment from changing it's size all the time, and it will never get filled.


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 10, 2006)

*Agreed, 110% - been doing it that way for decade++ now*

See my subject-line/title above... 

I've been doing that for years, since NT 3.51 & 1993 or so!

(& that same technique, with a LITTLE variation? It performs even BETTER if done on a disk separate from your main program & OS bearing HDD, & even moreso on a solid-state ramdrive disk).

NOTE, that in my signature below, I use this technique? 

E.G.-> How & where I do it, w/ what types of files or data, & on a solid-state ramdisk drive...

I.E.-> Exactly what you're stating & THEN some... all for performance-related purposes!

APK

P.S.=> It's going to be even BETTER here this year @ some point, once the DDRDrive x1 PCI-e DDR-2 Solid-State drive releases:







That Solid-State RamDrive uses faster memory than my current SSD, a CENATEK "RocketDrive" does first of all!

(DDRDrive uses DDR memory, & the CENATEK "RocketDrive" uses PC-133 SDRAM memory)

Plus, the DDRDrive also uses a faster bus type!

(DDRDRive uses PCI-Express bus (x4 slot = 1,000MBps), vs. PCI 2.2 which my CENATEK RocketDrive uses (133mb/sec))

Faster by far as well... 

Thus, not only will I have the fast seektimes ramdisks afford, but faster seeking due to faster memory type utilized over the kind my current SSD has on it, but also faster BURSTING for read/write I-O as well, because the bus type in PCI-e is MANY ORDERS FASTER than PCI 2.2... by far! apk


----------



## CjStaal (Aug 10, 2006)

sweet ramdisk man...


> (& that same technique, with a LITTLE variation? It performs even BETTER if done on a disk separate from your main program & OS bearing HDD, & even moreso on a solid-state ramdrive disk).


Yeah I know it performs better especially on a different HDD that's why I emphasised "even on the same HDD" because some people think that it won't help if it's on the same HDD no matter what you do


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 10, 2006)

Cj_Staal said:
			
		

> sweet ramdisk man...



Better than the one I use now even... I, for one, eagerly await the DDRDrive x1 PCI-e model release date!



			
				Cj_Staal said:
			
		

> Yeah I know it performs better especially on a different HDD that's why I emphasised "even on the same HDD" because some people think that it won't help if it's on the same HDD no matter what you do



Yes, it can help some, by avoiding fragmentation of ITSELF, AND other files too (as it grows/shrinks as you mentioned...) by placing it into its OWN separate partition on the SAME disk, but faster IF done on a 2nd disk on its FIRST partition (fastest outermost tracks is where partition #1 forms) & FASTER on a SSD by far.

APK


----------



## Boneface (Aug 10, 2006)

how does one do that....?


----------



## CjStaal (Aug 10, 2006)

well you make a different partition, goto control panel, click system, go to advanced, performance, settings, advanced, virtual memory, change, *DISABLE PAGING FILE ON C* and then set a 4096mb Min and Max page file on the partition you are going to use.


----------



## Boneface (Aug 10, 2006)

ok question mine is set at just over 2000mb....does that matter? and  by disable u mean to do what here...this is a pic of what im seeing


----------



## CjStaal (Aug 11, 2006)

Yopu should put it on a seperate partition


----------



## trog100 (Aug 13, 2006)

with 2 gig of real physical memory your system wont be useing the pagefile.. most of the stuff u read about improving its performance is years out of date and goes back to the days when a PC didnt have enough real memory.. 

alec has his on a ramdisk not a very slow hard drive.. when windows says pagefile in use it dosnt meant its useing the hardrive part of its virtual memory..

the bottom line here is simple.. if u dont have enough real memory and windows has to resort to its 300 times slower hardrive memory your system will grind to a stuttery halt..

so if u aint useing it.. it dosnt matter where u put it or how big it is.. 

i set mine to a minium size of 200 megs.. it never grows any bigger which quite simply tells me it never gets used with the amount of real memory i have and the software i use..

u can switch it off but somethings look for one even thow they dont use it.. 

i can force it to grow by loading say fear.. quake 4 and oblivion all at once.. he he he

but my 2 gigs of real memory will accomodate everything i sensibly do without having to resort to its hardrive memory.. 

if u hit contol/halt/delete that will tell u how much memory u have in use at any one time.. as long as the amount in use is less than the amount of real stuff u have u are okay.. if it aint buy some more of the real stuff.. 

trog


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 13, 2006)

trog100 said:


> with 2 gig of real physical memory your system wont be useing the pagefile.. most of the stuff u read about improving its performance is years out of date and goes back to the days when a PC didnt have enough real memory..



Think so? Ok... try to run Adobe Photoshop, w/ out a pagefile.sys present.

(Try to startup your OS itself, & not have it complain about it... because, it will... both apps WILL!)





trog100 said:


> alec has his on a ramdisk not a very slow hard drive.. when windows says pagefile in use it dosnt meant its useing the hardrive part of its virtual memory..



I do, & it makes a difference in performance... not just in benchmarks, but one I can literally see/feel... it only makes sense!

E.G. -> Std. electro-mechanical HDD's are 1000's of times/many orders of magnitude slower than RAM is, even on a SSD like I use.



trog100 said:


> the bottom line here is simple.. if u dont have enough real memory and windows has to resort to its 300 times slower hardrive memory your system will grind to a stuttery halt..



Well, it WILL form a "temporary" pagefile... if you don't have one present. 

AND, that will fragment itself as it "grows/shrinks", & other files on the disk platter it is on as well, as they too form &/or grow-shrink.

(After all, you have to remember: This IS what "Virtual Memory" based Os' are about & the nature of filesystems too - there is "no perfect world" & fragmentation results... & it IS, a "performance killer" & a non-static pagefile.sys is subject to fragmentation of itself, & other files as well - which is what this person is stating saying you are 'best served' by putting it on a separate partition - to avoid fragmentation)

Creating the "illusion" of more RAM than is physically present in RAM chips on your mobo... by 'swapping in & out' of memory, but not entire programs, only sections of them that are NOT presently in use/locked & in 4kb/4096 sized "pages"... it has a "downside" with a dynamically sizing/resizing pagefile.sys:

Pagefile.sys fragmentation & fragmentation of other files as well, as it grows &/or shrinks in response to paging.



trog100 said:


> so if u aint useing it.. it dosnt matter where u put it or how big it is..



That's WHERE you go wrong: It is always in use!

Again, keep in mind: That this IS what modern OS' are about, paging... to create the illusion of more RAM present than there actually is.



trog100 said:


> i set mine to a minium size of 200 megs.. it never grows any bigger which quite simply tells me it never gets used with the amount of real memory i have and the software i use..



That's the catch - you have to "analyze" it, & THAT? Takes time... & effort.

You have to first see how often you page & with what apps & then set your pagefile.sys size accordingly. 

You can "get away" with pagefile.sys SIZE minimization thru it... that is, until you hit an app or dataset using an app, that is TOO MUCH for what you set.

Personally? I go for the "old-school rule", albeit WITH SOME VARIATION: 

OLD-SCHOOL RULE = 1.5x physical RAM present should be the size of the pagefile.sys, up to 4gb limitations of 32-bit code memory addressability. 

AND YES, I go static in size to avoid fragging the pagefile.sys (and other apps, but mine is on its OWN partition, & that is all, a 1gb sized one on a Ramdisk/SSD).

I did a combining of the total of my RAM physically present on the mobo, & pagefile.sys size, to total up to what your system CAN address as a limit in 32-bit environs:

4gb, as that is ALL you can really use anyhow, in any 1 single app.

See, I did a bit of what you're stating, & a bit of the old-school rule-of-thumb: 

I have no apps that ask for more than 4gb first of all, they can't after all, as the Win32 API will fail on requests larger than 4gb typically iirc, from my own experimentations there.

So, I took my RAM amt. (512mb) x 1.5 = 765mb pagefile.sys & then went up to 1/2 again that (1gb, the size of my SSD partition for a pagefile.sys)!

I have YET to get an "out of memory" based err. here... that is nearly 12 years running using this "rule" of mine, no less.

Again though - DO see Adobe Photoshop though, as it is a HUGE "hog" for memory given larger data to work on & of course, an exception to any rule exists most times.



trog100 said:


> u can switch it off but somethings look for one even thow they dont use it..



Right, photoshop being one.



trog100 said:


> i can force it to grow by loading say fear.. quake 4 and oblivion all at once.. he he he



Right...



trog100 said:


> but my 2 gigs of real memory will accomodate everything i sensibly do without having to resort to its hardrive memory..



Perhaps for YOUR use patterns, but you also note exceptions. Rightfully so, there is always exceptions to rules... and outliers on any analyzation curve.

This is also one of the MOST debated topics there is online, that I have ever seen... these are good topics to debate, they make you THINK!



trog100 said:


> if u hit contol/halt/delete that will tell u how much memory u have in use at any one time.. as long as the amount in use is less than the amount of real stuff u have u are okay.. if it aint buy some more of the real stuff..
> 
> trog



Yes, taskmgr.exe & its "performance" tab is one of the tools you can use to analyze your typical personal use-patterns in applications & data you typically use, to try to "trim" the size of your pagefile.sys... but, again:

What happens when you hit an app or data in an app, that blows away your typical use-patterns & expectations?

You're unprepared... and, get "out of memory" type errors.

APK


----------



## trog100 (Aug 13, 2006)

we agree on some things alec but will have to dissagree on others..

i have the little 200 meg swopfile now called pagefile.sys just in case i ever run things like photoshop that look for the presence of a swopfile.. but i dont use photoshop much  i use psp-pro cos i am used to it.. i repeat my pagefile.sys never gets used with the amount of physical memory i have and the software i run.. 

u dont have to analyze your swopfile to see if its in use and windows will happily run fine without one and no it wont create a temporary one if u tell it not to..

and if u do actually run out of memory xp unlike earlier versions of windows dosnt even blue screen.. it just politely tells u that u dont have enough memory to run the application u have attempted to load..

when windows 95 first came out new machines designed to run it came with a standard 16 megs of physical system memory.. not so new machines had either 6 megs or less..

windows virtual system memory system was designed around such a scenario.. running on machines that did not have enough physical memory.. back in those days a 4 meg stick cost 25 english pounds.. 16 megs came in at 100 quid..

back then games did not run in the windows enviroment one booted out of windows and fired up in dos mode..

at present my machine has 250 megs of memory in use.. i have 1750 megs of spare physical memory doing bugger all..

if i load a memory intensive thing like a game.. lets say oblivion.. this takes up about 800 megs of my physical memory.. add this to my 250 already in use and i still have nearly a thousands megs spare..

i have put this to the test many times.. windows will only start to use its fake hardrive memory when it runs out of the real stuff..

i dont know what u use photoshop for either dude but most of the jpeg images i edit come in at about 4 meg max.. 1 gig of system memory is enough for.. errrr.. 250 seperate images or 250 undoes..

i also know that if my system did run out of real memory whilst working on large images.. instead of an image appearing in a couple of seconds it would take a couple of minutes to get hauled of the normal hardrive..

i also know that if my system runs out of real memory whilst playing a game my game will instantly become totally unplayable.. 

the answer is pretty simple.. i make sure i have enough real physical memory to handle the software i use.. if my system ever did grind to a swopfiling stuttery halt i would simply buy some more of the real stuff.. its cheap enough..

windows does not use its swopfile unless it has to.. a hardive is that slow compared to real physical memory that if windows is forced to use its hardrive based fake virtual memory part of things.. things become slooooo slow as to be unusable..

whatever u do with your swopfile.. if its hardrive based (unlike yours alec) your system will become a waste of space if windows has to resort to useing it.. 

i have 2 gigs of physical memory for a reason dude.. the reason is a simple one.. so that windows dosnt ever have to start swopfiling.. 

2 gigs is enough for what i do.. but i could and would easily install some more to stop my machine from having to use its hardrive to fill in for lack of the real stuff..

trog


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 13, 2006)

I'll say this, as I have here a few times now:

It ALL boils down to how you use your rig, point-blank!

(Application mix, tasks @ hand, etc. et al)



* I'll "get more into it" manan... I have to "attend to a female personnage/guest" who is being insistent on my attention!

APK


----------



## trog100 (Aug 13, 2006)

"It ALL boils down to how you use your rig, point-blank!"

it does.. u are perfectly correct.. 

but the real bottom line is the whole idea of unlimited system memory (virtual memory) by way of useing the hardrive to augment real physical memory is outdated rubbish and not really valid on a modern machine..

most younger folks.. those who belong to the cheap memory era and have never tried to run XP on 64 meg of ram or 95 on 16 megs have never seen swopfiling in action.. they read all this outdated junk about how to speed up their "virtual memory" and think it means something.. 

we have real physical memory (the hare) and we have the windows swopfile (the tortoise).. the two dont work that well together..

what makes matter worse is over the years the hare has been made to run a lot faster than it used to.. the speed dfifference tween the two is now so great the idea of useing the toroise when u run out of hares dont make a deal of sense any more..

1 or 2 gigs of (hare) memory is more than enough for most folks.. the silly tortoise part can be ignored and pensioned off.. whatever u do to the poor old thing aint gonna help if u have to start useing it.. 

trog

ps.. those still useing 250 megs of physical memory to run xp might benefit a little by speeding up the toroise a smidge.. but buying a couple more hares will benifit a million times more.. he he he


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 13, 2006)

Trog100, read ALL OF THIS, because the "devil's in the details", & an experiment you can perform & observe, yourself, will illustrate to you JUST HOW OFTEN PAGING OCCURS & how often "Virtual Memory" on disk in pagefile.sys is really used... here we go:



trog100 said:


> i have put this to the test many times.. windows will only start to use its fake hardrive memory when it runs out of the real stuff..



Not true, & I'll let you see for yourself how it is not. Explorer.exe is a PERFECT EXAMPLE thereof in fact, & its page faults will show you this (it is paging, all the time nearly, generating "page faults" & this is the KEY to this statement of mine - even though unused RAM is present? It is PAGING!)

You'll see below, perform the test I am noting... you'll see I am correct on this note.



trog100 said:


> windows does not use its swopfile unless it has to..



Untrue, and the experiment I am about to have you do? Will show you otherwise...

You're always using it whether you know it, or not.

Again: This IS the nature of these machines using the OS that they do... modern, virtual memory utilizing OS like Windows NT-based ones, & Linux (& others too).

*In fact, let me FINALLY prove this to you, by letting YOU prove it to yourself, ok?*

We'll do a little experiment below:



trog100 said:


> we have real physical memory (the hare) and we have the windows swopfile (the tortoise).. the two dont work that well together..



AGAIN: First of all did you know, that the pagefile.sys is "RAW WRITTEN" & bypasses normal filesystem access patterns & API calls? It read/written to FASTER THAN ORDINARY READ/WRITE ACCESS for your files & programs because of it & also because it is OS kernel subsystem driven (memory manager & iirc, partially cache mgr. they operate superclose with one another).

Au contraire, mon frere... They work well together & stop you from getting "out of memory" errors & the real "raison d' etre" for Virtual Memory Modern OS designs!

VERY well in fact, especially considering HOW the pagefile.sys is accessed (faster than normal read/writes to ordinary files on disk in fact)!

Let me give you an example you can SEE for yourself:

*A simple way to see this, is to start a NEW program! Leave it onscreen as a normal sized window.*

Then, open up Taskmgr.exe, & get into its PROCESSES tab... 

Use its VIEW menu, SELECT COLUMNS submenu, & check off "Virtual Memory Size", "Memory Usage", & "Peak Memory Usage", & "Page Faults Delta" columns. They will show in the processes tab as VMSize, Mem Usage, Peak Mem Usage, & Page Faults, respectively.

Go back to PROCESSES tab in taskmgr.exe & pay close attention to the new program you started by first hiliting its row, & then, note the VMSize & pagefaults columns!

(That is what is allocated to that process in Virtual Memory (& again, keep in mind: THAT ALL MEMORY? Is "Virtual" in today's OS', both RAM in chips AND pagefile.sys space combined)).

Now, minimize the process to the startbar!

Tell us what happened to the numbers in the Mem Usage column... 

(They went down for that program you just minimized, didn't they?)

Now, when you restore that window (to normal size) they go up again.

Where do you think the RAM went for that program when you minimized it?

Did the program just "get rid of it"??

NO! 

(EDIT PART - possibly SOME, this is known as "discardables" to program, but usually iirc? That happens when an app starts up, or dumps data it was using, but no longer is anymore, currently).

NOTE - this doesn't happen on Win9x, I never saw it happen (while doing the min/max of a window program running test)... 

THIS, is a BIG diff. in Windows-NT based OS exists here from my experiments in the past w/ Win9x vs. NT!

It paged down to disk, in pagefile.sys, what is not immediately used resources it has!

(Things like its screen images, buttons, tabs, controls of all kinds etc. from its interface & more when NOT visible/normal window view OR maximized, vs. minimized)

Right down to your Pagefile.sys & it went into the block of size allocated to it (shown in taskmgr.exe as "VM Size" in fact!)

What can illustrate that in taskmgr.exe? 

*The PAGE FAULT column!*

As you minimize, maximize/restore a Window? You'll see it move LIKE MAD!

*Here is what a "page fault" is by its definition:*

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

An event that occurs when a thread refers to an invalid (out-of-date) VM page. The VM manager must refresh the page from the page file. See VM.
docs.rinet.ru/NTServak/glossary.htm

A page fault is an exception which is raised by the memory management unit when a needed page is not mapped in physical memory. This exception is passed on to the operating system which will bring the required page into physical memory. 
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Page_fault

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That entire memory block is still claimed by the process, but paged out because it is no longer the foreground process & its resources (window elements like buttons, tabs, etc.) are no longer in use if not visible on screen!

They got paged out to disk into that VMSize allotted area which you have visible! *Explorer.exe especially (your GUI shell)?

You'll note it is nearly CONSTANTLY generating page faults & thus, paging its data in & out of the pagefile.sys - EVEN IF FREE, UNUSED RAM, IS PRESENT!*

VM Size, iirc, is based on its PEAK MEM USAGE (usually @ startup of a program, it takes a LITTLE BIT MORE to load itself than it needs to keep running from then onwards).



trog100 said:


> i also know that if my system runs out of real memory whilst playing a game my game will instantly become totally unplayable..



Again, did you know, that the pagefile.sys is "RAW WRITTEN" & bypasses normal filesystem access patterns & API calls & is driven by preferred CPU status OS kernel subsystems in the OS kernel memory mgr (ring 0/rpl 0/kernel mode operations, get pref. over usermode/Ring3/RPL3 stuff)? 

I.E.-> It read/written to FASTER THAN ORDINARY READ/WRITE ACCESS for your files & programs because of it.

Secondly:

Your program that is generating PAGE FAULTING (more details exist on that above, important & ones you CAN SEE)?

It is thus, always "useable" (albeit possibly not enjoyable if paging data in & out of the pagefile)... but, it will NOT just "die" either as long as there is diskspace open for pagefile.sys growths, that is.

It will contine to run & not throw "out of memory" style errs because of it...

It will run, albeit more slowly than if it was TOTALLY in RAM & had all of its memory requirements satisfied by PURE "RAM IN CHIPS"... not paging it in & out of RAM in 4kb/4096 bytes increments.

When you have a foreground process demanding more memory than is physically present in RAM chips on your mobo that is unused then, the memory manager will page to disk what is NOT immediately locked by other running processes in 4096k increments until sufficient memory is available for this NEW process coming into existence, &/or one that is demanding more RAM to do its work.



trog100 said:


> but the real bottom line is the whole idea of unlimited system memory (virtual memory) by way of useing the hardrive to augment real physical memory is outdated rubbish and not really valid on a modern machine..



It's not "unlimited", it is limited to the 4gb max memory addressability of 32-bit OS, & goes up in 64-bit ones.

That's where you're "off" man! Today's OS ARE VIRTUAL MEMORY BASED & ALL MEMORY TO THEM? IS VIRTUAL! Even RAM chip memory + pagefile.sys in total of them both.

Even IF you don't tell Windows to make a pagefile.sys? It will, a temporary one, that is subject to fragmentation of itself & yes, other files as it "grows/shrinks".

And, the very idea behind today's modern operating systems? IS Virtual memory use because to Windows? ALL MEMORY IS "VIRTUAL" AS FAR AS THE OS IS CONCERNED!

Which is exactly what you say is obsolete!

(the use of diskspace as memory (temporary swapped out/paged out in 4kb/4096kb increments of portions of programs &/or data that are NOT in use or locked)).



trog100 said:


> most younger folks.. those who belong to the cheap memory era and have never tried to run XP on 64 meg of ram or 95 on 16 megs have never seen swopfiling in action.. they read all this outdated junk about how to speed up their "virtual memory" and think it means something..



It does! Espcially what the post starter outlined... & the fact you are ALWAYS paging in today's VM using OS'... The technique he outlines avoids fragmentation of the pagefile.sys itself, generally, & other programs on disk with it, & it works.

In fact, this whole experiment & scenario I let you do above?

That is WHY I can see my system is faster (I rarely hear the HDD in fact, mechanical RAID 0 array here with a 128mb cache onboard it & managed by an onboard CPU on the RAID controller ontop of Windows diskcache OR what I use (SuperCache-II, better cache for NT-OS)) than normal ones using std. HDD bound diskdrives as a pagefile.sys location!

Off the SSD with my pagefile.sys on it? FAR FASTER ACCESS/SEEK to pagefile.sys interior data is why too.

Others not doing this "hit disk" which are 1000's of times (literally) slower than the SSD I use for my pagefile.sys location by far... 

I.E.-> I page program data & resources in & out of it 1000's of times faster than most folks can & thus, see a performance diff. in the operation of Windows, especially in terms of Virtual Memory use & your Explorer.exe GUI shell? Probably the BEST EXAMPLE of a program constantly doing it... generating page faults (read/writes to pagefile.sys).



trog100 said:


> "It ALL boils down to how you use your rig, point-blank!"
> it does.. u are perfectly correct..



Yes I am. 

DO read this closely, & in its entirety.

The experiment above I noted for you to try?

That should illustrate to you the concept @ hand:

It WILL show you HOW paging is used & when (quite a lot, process by process in fact & that's what I will let you illustrate to yourself below using taskmgr.exe - explorer.exe your GUI shell? CONSTANTLY @ IT, paging data in & out of the pagefile.sys in fact as one example of how often you use your HDD pagefile.sys virtual memory area).

APK

P.S.=> It's pretty easy to see, if you do what I noted above as an experiment... but, moreso with an application like Photoshop, & even Windows itself if you bootup w/ out a pagefile.sys present (permanent one), & it WILL complain... & just end up forming a temporary pagefile.sys anyhow!

I think that will illustrate to you, for yourself to see, just how often you really ARE paging, & using VM on disk in pagefile.sys (page faulting WILL illustrate that to you, without question)... apk


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 13, 2006)

UP for trog100 & others to read the above, & try the experiment showing how often paging occurs, & why/how, on modern Virtual Memory utilizing OS...

APK


----------



## trog100 (Aug 13, 2006)

face to face (verbally) i could probably converse with u for hours alec.. but sadly my keyboard skills aint up to doing it on here.. he he

trog


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 13, 2006)

The main points of yours for me to disprove were these, vs. the statement you made above quoted next (they are in error & so is the one I quote in the next post below it):



trog100 said:


> i have put this to the test many times.. windows will only start to use its fake hardrive memory when it runs out of the real stuff..



Not true!

I'll let you see for yourself how it is not in fact & gave you the experiment to do so, above.

Explorer.exe, your GUI shell, is a PERFECT EXAMPLE thereof in fact!

Its constant generation of page faults will show you this (it is paging, all the time nearly, generating "page faults" & this is the KEY to this statement of mine - even though unused RAM is present? It is PAGING!)

You'll see above for yourself:

Do perform the test I noted using taskmgr.exe, it's PROCESSES tab, & having "VM Size", "Memory Usage" (all of them present, might as well), & "Page Faults" visible on screen... 

Do that, you'll see I am correct on this note.



trog100 said:


> windows does not use its swopfile unless it has to..



Untrue!

The experiment I had you do above? 

Will show you otherwise... guaranteed.

You're always using it whether you know it, or not.

Again: This IS the nature of these machines using the OS that they do... modern, virtual memory utilizing OS like Windows NT-based ones, & Linux (& others too).



APK

P.S.=> Drink it in, & digest it - because it IS how things work on these machines, & modern OS... 

Whether you like it or not, pagefile gets used, ALL THE TIME, & pagefaults shown happening illustrate it perfectly in fact (as well as the experiment I ask you to do above), especially in your GUI explorer.exe shell (constantly generating pagefaults - which are access read/write IO to the pagefile.sys itself, proving paging goes on ALL the time, even if FREE RAM IS PRESENT)...

It's tough to deny the facts, ones you can see for yourself no less... & so can others, if they do what I noted above... easily analyzed! apk


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 13, 2006)

trog100 said:


> u dont have to analyze your swopfile to see if its in use and windows will happily run fine without one and no it wont create a temporary one if u tell it not to..



That's another one you are incorrect on (in a few cases, see below)... 

The OS forms in VARIOUS circumstances when a permanent pagefile.sys is NOT present, & for the very reasons I state above & which the experiment showing explorer.exe GUI shell paging even IF free ram is present!

See here:

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=257758

*SYMPTOM:*

"When you set the paging file (Pagefile.sys) on your computer to a size that is lower than the recommended size of 12 megabytes (MB) plus the amount of random access memory (RAM), a temporary paging file (Temppf.sys) may be created, and you may receive the following error message after you log on: 
Limited Virtual Memory

Your system is running without a properly sized paging file. Please use the virtual memory option of the System applet in the Control Panel to create a paging file, or to increase the initial size of your paging file. 	Back to the top

*CAUSE*

This issue can occur when the temporary paging file uses a substantial amount of free space on the hard disk, and the remaining available hard disk space is less than the initial size of the paging file setting that you configured in Control Panel."

&

"The error message listed earlier in this article can occur when the initial paging file size is reduced to an amount considerably smaller than the recommended amount. Windows recognizes that the paging file size is insufficient and creates a temporary paging file of up to 20 megabytes in the Winnt\System32 folder. The System dialog box in Control Panel is then displayed, forcing you to address the paging file problem."

*APPLIES TO*

•	Microsoft Windows 2000 Server
•	Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server
•	Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional Edition
•	Microsoft Windows 2000 Datacenter Server
•	Microsoft Windows NT Server 3.5
•	Microsoft Windows NT Server 3.51
•	Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 Standard Edition
•	Microsoft Windows NT Advanced Server 3.1
•	Microsoft Windows NT Workstation 3.5
•	Microsoft Windows NT Workstation 3.51
•	Microsoft Windows NT Workstation 4.0 Developer Edition
•	Microsoft Windows NT Workstation 3.1
•	Microsoft Windows NT Advanced Server 3.1
•	Microsoft Windows NT Server 3.5
•	Microsoft Windows NT Server 3.51



(And, yes, XP + Windows Server 2003 & even VISTA too... VM & how it works? Still the same for the MOST part, & definitely in the regards we have been discussing them in, here in this thread!)

APK

P.S.=> This is a result of NT-based OS' VMS based heritage, because VMS does the SAME THING for the most part... and, I have already proven you are ALWAYS paging, via a simple experiment you were free to try & witness... 

Especially how in taskmgr.exe (with Page Fault column, Memory Size, VM Size, etc present in the PROCESSES tab) will show you that, for example, Explorer.exe your GUI shell is constantly generating pagefaults (access to pagefile)... 

EVEN IF FREE UNUSED RAM IS PRESENT! apk


----------



## trog100 (Aug 15, 2006)

perhaps it does always use one alec.. but in normal uses it dosnt seem to.. perhaps if i tell it not to use one it ignores me and creates an invisible one that dosnt show up on my hardrive.. i dont know.. 

i do know what happends when a machine genuinely dosnt have enough physical memory and windows really has to use its swopfile in earnest.. the whole machine grinds to an unusable halt..

i also know that if i set my swopfile at a minimim of 200 megs as i have.. then i force load say one game of fear (highest quality textures) plus a game of say quake 4 and create a situation where task manager tells me i have a larger pagefile in use than the actual amount of physical ram i have the 200 meg swop file will grow in size accordingly.. 

if i have 2 gig of physical ram.. and task manager tells me i have 3 gig in use my little 200 meg pagfile.sys file will increase in size by the neccessary 800 megs or so to accomodate the needed 800 megs and grow to about 1 gig..

once enlarged it dosnt shrink back to 200 meg even if both games are shut down until the next reboot.. 

i know it does this by simply looking at it in explorer..

its this kinda thing that makes me say windows doesnt use its swopfile unless it has to.. 

i can force it to grow by loading multiple copies of games but during normal (sensible) usage it remains at the 200 meg minimum i set it at.. this lead me to believe windows dosnt use it unless it has to.. a reasonable conclusion from where i sit..

also my windows does seem to work perfectly okay without one.. xp seems to give me the option of not having one.. if as u say it then ignores what i tell it and creates one... where does it put it and what does it call it cos i cannot find a trace of it..

i also know that if i play the multiple game loading trick without a swopfile at all.. windows lets me carry on until i exceed my 2 gigs worth of physical ram then it polites tells me i dont have enough memory to load the next applcation.. 

this dosnt kinda go along with windows ignoring my no swopfile command and creating one.. it suggests exactly the opposite.. 

are we talking about the same thing here alec cos to me it seems we aint..

i see positive evidence of one thing.. u see positive evidence of another.. admittedly we are useing different methods to arrive at our conclusions..  but something is odd.. 

i have run your little test by the way.. three apps.. firefox.. thunderbird and winamp.. only winamp showed different figures maximized or minimized.. the other two stayed the same..

but the test dosnt cause me to disbelieve the evidence i see with the different kinda tests i run.. 

trog

ps.. i will also say what i see does suprise me.. it dosnt fit with what i commonly read about windows and its pagefile usage.. ..


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 15, 2006)

trog100 said:


> perhaps it does always use one alec.. but in normal uses it dosnt seem to.. perhaps if i tell it not to use one it ignores me and creates an invisible one that dosnt show up on my hardrive.. i dont know..



It does, temppf.sys... see above & why plus in what conditions.

BUT paging? It's ALWAYS happening in your GUI shell, this you can see for yourself... & it has to be paging to SOMEWHERE man... someplace on a disk!

You may not note it, but you have to keep this in mind:

Pagefile.sys access FASTER than normal files do (see above) for many reasons... raw writes/reads, & iirc, using NtAPI native calls & driven by OS kernel subsystems (which DO get preference over usermode stuff) in the memory mgt. & cache mgt. phase (these 2? work REALLY close together). 



trog100 said:


> i do know what happends when a machine genuinely dosnt have enough physical memory and windows really has to use its swopfile in earnest.. the whole machine grinds to an unusable halt..



Yes, of course... which is WHY I went w/ the "technique" I use (Solid-State Ramdrive placement, & that? Will only get FASTER here, once I get the DDRDrive vs. the CENATEK "RocketDrive" I use now for that).



trog100 said:


> i also know that if i set my swopfile at a minimim of 200 megs as i have.. then i force load say one game of fear (highest quality textures) plus a game of say quake 4 and create a situation where task manager tells me i have a larger pagefile in use than the actual amount of physical ram i have the 200 meg swop file will grow in size accordingly..



Right... this is what the post starter was talking about - & how to AVOID fragmenting the pagefile.sys during growth (or, shrinkage), & thus, also avoid fragging other files too!



trog100 said:


> if i have 2 gig of physical ram.. and task manager tells me i have 3 gig in use my little 200 meg pagfile.sys file will increase in size by the neccessary 800 megs or so to accomodate the needed 800 megs and grow to about 1 gig..



Again, note what the poster stated who started this thread... he's correct on that account, & using a separate partition on your first drive CAN help... but, putting it on a 2nd disk, on the FIRST partition (forms on outermost fastest tracks) speeds it up more, & also doesn't interfere with your OS & Programs housing main C: drive... speeding it up in effect, & NOT fragmenting other files there, due to pagefile.sys size changes.



trog100 said:


> once enlarged it dosnt shrink back to 200 meg even if both games are shut down until the next reboot..



Right... that's IF you use the reghack to "wipe" your pagefile.sys @ next bootup for security purposes!

(This is also doable in Secpol.msc, graphically iirc as well, & if not THAT MMC.exe snapin? Then it is in gpedit.msc (not in Windows XP Home, but PRO upwards)), especially.

It will probably reform to "normal size" @ bootup too, I will take your word on THAT account as you see it happening.



trog100 said:


> its this kinda thing that makes me say windows doesnt use its swopfile unless it has to..



Trust me, it does... again:

Do the SIMPLE experiment I show last page, showing paging occuring, in taskmgr.exe using the columns I noted? PageFaults are the key (that IS paging). 



trog100 said:


> i can force it to grow by loading multiple copies of games but during normal (sensible) usage it remains at the 200 meg minimum i set it at.. this lead me to believe windows dosnt use it unless it has to.. a reasonable conclusion from where i sit..



You'd think it... but, paging being shown to be occuring by explorer.exe constantly is contrary & concrete proof, otherwise.

Also, doing the other RESTORE-MINIMIZE experiment with any app you use will show it as well, & for the reasons I noted last page.

DO TRY THEM - see for yourself, this is the BEST proof I can offer you!



trog100 said:


> also my windows does seem to work perfectly okay without one.. xp seems to give me the option of not having one.. if as u say it then ignores what i tell it and creates one... where does it put it and what does it call it cos i cannot find a trace of it..



Depends on what you do, but next time you do that? Seek temppf.sys under %SystemRoot% (%Windir%\system32)... make sure Explorer.exe can SEE "System & Hidden Files" first though.

(Some "conditions" have to be met for this to occur though, see above in my quote from MS pages in regards to it forming)...



trog100 said:


> i also know that if i play the multiple game loading trick without a swopfile at all.. windows lets me carry on until i exceed my 2 gigs worth of physical ram then it polites tells me i dont have enough memory to load the next applcation..



It should have formed temppf.sys when you booted up WITHOUT a pagefile.sys, when it warns you are "running without a properly sized pagefile" etc. (again, see the conditions MS outlines above, for THIS to happen though).



trog100 said:


> this dosnt kinda go along with windows ignoring my no swopfile command and creating one.. it suggests exactly the opposite..



All I can tell you is, look for what I told you, & do those tests... they are proof of paging happening... it's what VM using modern OS, are about... again:

PageFaulting - it's key!



trog100 said:


> are we talking about the same thing here alec cos to me it seems we aint..



Sure we are, try the tests I note last page - they're EASY to do!

(Plus, the 2nd post of mine in regard to temppf.sys? Well, that was the best proof I could give of that... Windows making a temporary pagefile when needed @ bootup, when you don't have a permanent one(again, see the conditions MS outlines above, for THIS to happen though))



trog100 said:


> i see positive evidence of one thing.. u see positive evidence of another.. admittedly we are useing different methods to arrive at our conclusions..  but something is odd..



Sure seems that way - I used Microsoft's documentation in regard to temppf.sys formation... perhaps you should test this, after reading the conditions in which it is generated on the last page I quoted?

It would be GOOD to see how "accurate" that info. from MS, is... it is fairly current too!



trog100 said:


> i have run your little test by the way.. three apps.. firefox.. thunderbird and winamp.. only winamp showed different figures maximized or minimized.. the other two stayed the same..



It's possible... but, again: Explorer.exe (your GUI shell/desktop)?

It's constantly paging, generating PAGEFAULTS.



trog100 said:


> but the test dosnt cause me to disbelieve the evidence i see with the different kinda tests i run..



Well, then, I don't know what to tell you man, I really don't!

I can only let you see evidence of paging (which IS "pagefaults" by its very definition & visible/monitorable in taskmgr.exe when the pagefaults column is selected & visible).



trog100 said:


> trog
> 
> ps.. i will also say what i see does suprise me.. it dosnt fit with what i commonly read about windows and its pagefile usage.. ..



It's from Microsoft... the horses' mouth, as to temppf.sys formations (temp pagefile.sys when you don't have one period) & the test I noted?

Well, pagefaults? They ARE paging... literally!

APK

P.S.=> Good discussion (one of the most debated online in fact, almost as much as sizing a pagefile.sys)... 

Perhaps others will read this, & offer THEIR take on it...

Cj_Staal states it is a "dramatic" performance increase... I'll disagree on that, but it does boost things potentially (fragging-wise & preventing it) on the same partition ON THE SAME DISKDRIVE as pagefile.sys size changes can occur... 

It WILL offer better performance if done on a 2nd HDD on its first partition (fastest, outermost tracks is where partition #1 will/should form)!

Better still, & even MORE on an SSD as I do it currently! apk


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 15, 2006)

*OTHERS ARE DISCUSSIN G THIS HERE TOO, & others are attempting what I & CJ_STAAL state*

See here, very similar thread here today:

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?p=136233#post136233



APK


----------



## trog100 (Aug 15, 2006)

alec i have read that much conflicting rubbish about windows and its pagefile i now dont believe any of it.. 

take this bit from your last post..

"Originally Posted by trog100  View Post
i also know that if i play the multiple game loading trick without a swopfile at all.. windows lets me carry on until i exceed my 2 gigs worth of physical ram then it polites tells me i dont have enough memory to load the next applcation..

It should have formed temppf.sys when you booted up WITHOUT a pagefile.sys, when it warns you are "running without a properly sized pagefile" etc. (again, see the conditions MS outlines above, for THIS to happen though)."

okay it dosnt do as u say it should.. it simply functions perfectly normall  providing i dont exceed the amount of physical ram i actually have.. then when i try and bung more data into memory i dont have (before i ran this test i assumed it would blue screen) it simply tells me i dont have enough memeory and aborts the application loading..

i am now gonna remove my little 200 meg minimum size swop file and look very hard for this "temppf.sys" file u tell me windows should create..

i have also tried the fat32 partition and all sorts of tricks following what i read on the net in the past.. not a jot of difference can i tell..

just for interest.. whats your take on the "pre fetch" thing.. another xp thing that tons of completely wrong rubbish is written about..

anyways i am about to turn off my swopfile and run my machine without one.. and if i cant find any trace of the  "temppf.sys" file u tell me windows should create.. "I'll be back" to quote a well known movie charactor.. he he

trog


----------



## CjStaal (Aug 15, 2006)

Trog, search google on the benifits of having the PageFile on a FAT32 partition.


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 15, 2006)

trog100 said:


> alec i have read that much conflicting rubbish about windows and its pagefile i now dont believe any of it..



Because you're not paying attention to the constraints the MS page lays out that I referred to (dated in year 2004, fairly current) dude!

You are not seeing this errmsg:

"Limited Virtual Memory

Your system is running without a properly sized paging file. Please use the virtual memory option of the System applet in the Control Panel to create a paging file, or to increase the initial size of your paging file."

When you bootup... & thus, it MAY not form. With 2gb of RAM?? Most likely not...

*I mean, lol, w/ 2gb of RAM present, + a 200mb pagefile.sys? You may NEVER see it form!

You would have to have a SUB 12mb pagefile.sys, according to the URL, not 200mb one like you have... read the definition of the constraint (one of them).*

The URL from MS: I post it again below... for your reference!



trog100 said:


> okay it dosnt do as u say it should.. it simply functions perfectly normall  providing i dont exceed the amount of physical ram i actually have..



Gosh man, of COURSE not, you haven't exceeded your RAM in chips... that's part of the constraints for temppf.sys to form!

See below!



trog100 said:


> then when i try and bung more data into memory i dont have (before i ran this test i assumed it would blue screen) it simply tells me i dont have enough memeory and aborts the application loading..



Well, that's up to YOU, if you don't mind you apps crashing/abending/erring out/aborting on you...



trog100 said:


> i am now gonna remove my little 200 meg minimum size swop file and look very hard for this "temppf.sys" file u tell me windows should create..



DO! That's the test... verbatim, from that page @ MS:

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=257758

*SYMPTOM:*

"When you *set the paging file (Pagefile.sys) on your computer to a size that is lower than the recommended size of 12 megabytes (MB) plus the amount of random access memory (RAM), a temporary paging file (Temppf.sys) may be created,* and you may receive the following error message after you log on:

Limited Virtual Memory

Your system is running without a properly sized paging file. Please use the virtual memory option of the System applet in the Control Panel to create a paging file, or to increase the initial size of your paging file. Back to the top

*CAUSE*

This issue can occur when the temporary paging file uses a substantial amount of free space on the hard disk, and the remaining available hard disk space is less than the initial size of the paging file setting that you configured in Control Panel."

&

"The error message listed earlier in this article can occur when the initial paging file size is reduced to an amount considerably smaller than the recommended amount. Windows recognizes that the paging file size is insufficient and creates a temporary paging file of up to 20 megabytes in the Winnt\System32 folder. The System dialog box in Control Panel is then displayed, forcing you to address the paging file problem."

*APPLIES TO*

• Microsoft Windows 2000 Server
• Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server
• Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional Edition
• Microsoft Windows 2000 Datacenter Server
• Microsoft Windows NT Server 3.5
• Microsoft Windows NT Server 3.51
• Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 Standard Edition
• Microsoft Windows NT Advanced Server 3.1
• Microsoft Windows NT Workstation 3.5
• Microsoft Windows NT Workstation 3.51
• Microsoft Windows NT Workstation 4.0 Developer Edition
• Microsoft Windows NT Workstation 3.1
• Microsoft Windows NT Advanced Server 3.1
• Microsoft Windows NT Server 3.5
• Microsoft Windows NT Server 3.51

(And, yes, XP + Windows Server 2003 & even VISTA too... VM & how it works? Still the same for the MOST part, & definitely in the regards we have been discussing them in, here in this thread!)

*I mean, lol, w/ 2gb of RAM present, + a 200mb pagefile.sys? You may NEVER see it form!

You would have to have a SUB 12mb pagefile.sys, according to the URL, not 200mb one like you have... read the definition of the constraint (one of them).*



trog100 said:


> i have also tried the fat32 partition and all sorts of tricks following what i read on the net in the past.. not a jot of difference can i tell..



That's pretty easy to explain - computers move in ms/ns ranges, human beings, don't... benchmark programs & such may be able to see/show us diff.'s in scores & such, but our sense usually won't - especially when say, 2 systems are VERY close in speed, period.



trog100 said:


> just for interest.. whats your take on the "pre fetch" thing.. another xp thing that tons of completely wrong rubbish is written about..



Placements of files during bootup based on usage... placed nearer to the outermost tracks of the HDD, so they are accessed faster (physics really, like how a larger tire will move you faster than smaller tires do, due to greater radius etc. & surface area covered per revolution (sort of like that)).



trog100 said:


> anyways i am about to turn off my swopfile and run my machine without one.. and if i cant find any trace of the  "temppf.sys" file u tell me windows should create.. "I'll be back" to quote a well known movie charactor.. he he
> 
> trog



There you go! It cannot hurt, provided you meet the conditions noted above... If you do, you SHOULD see the temppf.sys form under %Windir%\system32 (same as %systemroot%)!

APK


----------



## trog100 (Aug 15, 2006)

i have searched google.. many times.. i know the theoretic benifits.. i have even had my pagefile.sys on a small  fat 32 partition.. i have had my pagefile every size and every place.. nary a jot of difference have i detected..

as i said in my last post i now have no pagfile and am about to search for the one alec tells me windows will make..  i came back here to find its name..

trog


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 15, 2006)

trog100 said:


> i have searched google.. many times.. i know the theoretic benifits.. i have even had my pagefile.sys on a small  fat 32 partition.. i have had my pagefile every size and every place.. nary a jot of difference have i detected..



Again, your senses? Don't operate in ns/ms increments typically-most likely... as a human being? I doubt we can "perceive strong benefits or diff.'s from it" as we don't move or think as fast as PC's CPU's do... but, they do, & this is WHY we run 'benchmarks' really!

* To see & get "quantitative descriptions" & numbers showing us the differences!



trog100 said:


> as i said in my last post i now have no pagfile and am about to search for the one alec tells me windows will make..  i came back here to find its name..
> 
> trog



It's temppf.sys, & you (in your case) would need say, a 1-11mb pagefile.sys setup, & then under %SystemRoot%, you SHOULD see a temppf.sys form...

(With 2gb of RAM online though? This ought to be interesting... & you SHOULD see a pagefile.sys warning from the OS when you bootup, IF you follow those directions from MS above & set a 1-11mb pagefile.sys up, instead of your current 200mb one!)



APK


----------



## trog100 (Aug 15, 2006)

alec.. i now have no hardrive based page file.. windows has not made any attemp to create a temporary "temppf.sys" file.. i have no such file..

i have just rebooted.. my system is set to show all files.. 

my system appears to be functioning perfectly normally as it should..  

i am keeping my replies short to save u typeing with your quote type style.. 

i might not be satisfying M/S's conditions (i am proud of that) but if i dont have any hard disk based page file even a temorary one how on earth can windows be possibly useing one..????

seeing is believing alec.. googling and techno babble is nine tenths bullshit.. please dont send me off to read more bullshit..

i also never exceed in memory usage the amount of physical memory i have..  i never have to.. its not good for performance and that dosnt need a benchmark to tell me.. 

trog


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 15, 2006)

trog100 said:


> alec.. i now have no hardrive based page file.. windows has not made any attemp to create a temporary "temppf.sys" file.. i have no such file..



Apparently, if you don't see the errmsg @ bootup, the file will NOT generate, with 2gb of RAM present is all.



trog100 said:


> i have just rebooted.. my system is set to show all files..
> 
> my system appears to be functioning perfectly normally as it should..



Good. You aren't getting warnings from the OS, & thus, it appears that w/ 2gb online or more, you won't see the errs noted on the page directly from MS! Such as the "bootup" errs of stating you have an insufficiently sized pagefile.sys.

I know that here, w/ 512mb of RAM onboard in RAM chips, that  IF I lose my RAMDisk partition w/ my pagefile.sys on it? 

I see them... 

(I.E.-> Errs about running w/out a pagefile.sys... & the OS forms one in my C:\ Root!)



trog100 said:


> i am keeping my replies short to save u typeing with your quote type style..



It allows me to address your points, POINT-BY-POINT, hopefully so I do NOT miss any of your points.



trog100 said:


> i might not be satisfying M/S's conditions (i am proud of that) but if i dont have any hard disk based page file even a temorary one how on earth can windows be possibly useing one..????



Good for you. See my questions below then, in my P.S....



trog100 said:


> seeing is believing alec.. googling and techno babble is nine tenths bullshit.. please dont send me off to read more bullshit..



I admit, I don't like being spoken to in that manner. Please, keep it cool, ok?? I didn't write MS page up there (though fairly current from June 2003)

Who also says that when you have 2gb of RAM present, you are not going to see those things noted DIRECTLY FROM MS, above??

Secondly: That "bullshit" above? 

It is not off "GOOGLE"!

It is from the designer of the OS itself, Microsoft... it is from (iirc) the year 2003, June as the month, thus, probably NOT out of date... I do like anyone else would, head STRAIGHT to the horses' mouth (MS) for clarification - they did build their OS, after all!

THOUGH possibly? Incomplete as to systems with 2gb or more of RAM as you have... that is all.



trog100 said:


> i also never exceed in memory usage the amount of physical memory i have..  i never have to.. its not good for performance and that dosnt need benchmark to tell me..
> 
> trog



WELL, Try it with larger apps, & data sets that exceed your 2gb RAM + 200mb pagefile.sys... see what happens!

BUT, you seem to already note what does - you will abend/errout, noted by yourself above... that's ok IF you don't mind it, I suppose.

I can't afford that here. Not really. Time = money.

APK

P.S.=> *QUESTION:*

*First:*

I proved that for example, Explorer.exe IS PAGING, all the time, even w/ free RAM present...

Do you concede this? You should, if you performed the simple test I noted...

*Second:*

Ever stop to think, since I showed you that YOU ARE PAGING, even with FREE RAM PRESENT, that it is swapping/paging to someplace? 

*Third:*

Tell me, where is that then that it is paging to... ?? 

(That is all I am curious about... it must be "paging into thin air" I suppose)... apk


----------



## trog100 (Aug 16, 2006)

the problem with quote type replies alec is it make them very dfficult to reply to and gets silly as the interchange progresses.. 

first and most relevant point alec is how do u know i am telling the truth.. u dont but u could do as u keep telling me to do.. run the same tests i am running.. 

"That's apparently because all you do is game... Try it with larger apps, & data sets that exceed your 2gb RAM + 200mb pagefile.sys..."

i do what i do alec.. which is more than game.. and probably more than most.. but if more physical ram would help i would install it.. i have 2 gigs cos 2 gigs is enough for what i do..

"Ever stop to think, since I showed you that YOU ARE PAGING, even with FREE RAM PRESENT, that it is swapping/paging to someplace?"

i have no idea alec.. with no sign of any hard disk based pagefile i am some what puzzled.. i have no "temppf.sys" file.. i have no pagefile.sys file.. u tell me where is windows paging to.. ???

i am not dealing with theory here alec just what i have in front of me.. a seeming mystery.. a fully functional xp system with nowhere else other than spare physical memory for windows to page to..

trog

ps.. i really dont mean to offend u alec.. but its beginning to look like its how i say it is.. windows only uses its disk based memory when it runs out of the real stuff.. most of the stuff u quote and believe is out of date and based on systems not coming with 2 gigs (enough) of real memory..

your own system only has 512 of real memory which isnt enough for what u do and that is why your system balks if u turn your ram dosk based swopfile off.. it seems your limitted physical memory quite clearly needs a some disk based help..

my system with 2 gigs of real ram seems to be breaking the old rules.. i would suggest that when it pages out it pages out to spare physical memeory..

its the only possible explanation for what i see in front of me.. which quite clearly isnt how u think it should be..

it isnt how i thought it should be either.. but it is what i see..

course if u think i am making all this up.. the entire debate kinda loses its point.. he he

and buddy i dont like being called a liar either but it could be a possibility.. one never kows on the internet.. he he


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

trog100 said:


> most of the stuff u quote and believe is out of date and based on systems not coming with 2 gigs (enough) of real memory..



Well, when you run out of RAM one day? We will see how "out of date it is", once you run into some work or data that demands more... if you can tolerate that? Fine... personally, I cannot.

I crash my development tools or servers? I am out of the work I just did... you might have the same happen, I don't know what else you do on a PC that might eat over 2gb... you may not period, ever.



trog100 said:


> ps.. i really dont mean to offend u alec.. but its beginning to look like its how i say it is.. windows only uses its disk based memory when it runs out of the real stuff..



You are paging, this much we BOTH know... yet, you don't have a pagefile.sys, nor even a temppf.sys... you MUST be paging to disk with SOME file... question is?

What file or files??

PAGEFAULTING is paging... point-blank!

You don't page RAM to RAM...

Plus, we both see your explorer.exe doing it constantly, and your other apps too (some of the ones that behaved as I described they would, winamp in your case, paging when minimized/maximized).

Question again - where to in the case of systems w/ 2gb of RAM??



trog100 said:


> ps.. i really dont mean to offend u alec..



You're not, only the "don't make me look @ bullshit" stuff sort of did... it's NOT MY 'bullshit' man, it's apparently MS'... but, there are some things making ME wonder as noted earlier & above in this reply!

You aren't even getting the warning about pagefile.sys being missing, with 2gb of RAM on your system... yet, here, with 512mb if I lose my pagefile.sys?

I get warnings & a new one is created in root of C: drive...



trog100 said:


> the problem with quote type replies alec is it make them very dfficult to reply to and gets silly as the interchange progresses..



My man, that is attempting to impose YOUR point of view upon others, & in this case, myself. 

Think about that...

Sure, you are entitled to that as it is your opinion!

BUT, I am sorry if my writing style bugs you... I do it for GOOD reason imo:  Again - I just use quotes in the manner I stated above - so I don't miss any points others made when I reply back is all.



trog100 said:


> first and most relevant point alec is how do u know i am telling the truth.. u dont but u could do as u keep telling me to do.. run the same tests i am running..



Apparently, something's up here... it must have to do w/ the fact you have 2gb total, because you don't even SEE the 'warning messages' I do when my pagefile partition on my ramdisk goes out (during power outages, it happens).

Let's assume you ARE telling the truth (which I am) & that Microsoft's page is "bullshit" as you say then!

Apparently, it is missing THAT piece of information apparently, or that condition, when someone has > 2gb RAM is all.

I cannot help it if Ms' documentation is off... but again: I know that when my pagefile.sys is missing, I certainly DO see messages about it being missing & another forms in the root of C:\ as pagefile.sys.



trog100 said:


> "Ever stop to think, since I showed you that YOU ARE PAGING, even with FREE RAM PRESENT, that it is swapping/paging to someplace?"
> 
> i have no idea alec.. with no sign of any hard disk based pagefile i am some what puzzled.. i have no "temppf.sys" file.. i have no pagefile.sys file.. u tell me where is windows paging to.. ???



Heh, should be either:

1.) Pagefile.sys

or

2.) Temppf.sys

(I personally don't know of any other paging type files the system would use, other than the older Windows 3.x types, which were not named either one of those, & which we are NOT talking about here as your OR my OS version)

Neither do I @ this point - your system is 'defying' the conditions noted on that tech page from MS, dated June 2003!



trog100 said:


> i am not dealing with theory here alec just what i have in front of me.. a seeming mystery.. a fully functional xp system with nowhere else other than spare physical memory for windows to page to..



It IS a mystery, because we both KNOW you're paging via the taskmgr.exe experiment we ran... it is WAY odd.

Know what I am thinking? 

That page from MS is missing conditions in which someone like yourself who has 2gb, doesn't have that happen in the conditions MS notes above @ this point (assuming you are telling it how it is & I do think you are telling it how it is over there on your rig is all).

Still, you're showing pagefaults inside taskmgr.exe process' tab on Explorer.exe your desktop gui shell... it HAS to be paging, to SOMEWHERE on disk... but where, on your system?

APK

P.S.=> BUT, it still does NOT explain where you ARE paging to, since pagefaults ARE generating from explorer.exe & we both know that is the case... NOW, I am curious as hell!

Guess what I am going to do? GOOGLE THE HELL OUT OF PAGEFILE.SYS and 2gb, & see what turns up... prefereably from MS itself!

What else can we do? I have never seen this before that I can recall @ least... apk


----------



## CjStaal (Aug 16, 2006)

Trog, I can say, from personal experience, putting the pagefile on a seperate partition will yeild an increase in performance that is noticable, and making that partition FAT32 will yeild an even greater performance benifit than NTFS.


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

Trog100:

I am going to find the path in the registry we can BOTH look @ for the heck of it in the memmgt section!

We'll see what you have in yours, vs. mine, which should show pagefile.sys (or other data regarding WHERE you are paging to).

Honestly? Like yourself as well??

This has me "mystified"...

*POINTS TO CONSIDER WHICH WE HAVE EXPLORED THUSFAR IN YOUR "MYSTERY" THERE:*

*1.)* We KNOW you're paging!

*2.)* Both of us have seen that on both of our machines via the taskmgr.exe explorations of the PROCESS tab's PAGE FAULT column usage, especially in the case of explorer.exe... and winamp.exe when you min/restore its window.

*3.)* QUESTION IS - Where ARE you paging to, over there??

*4.)* You have NO pagefile.sys or temppf.sys present - ODD!

APK

P.S.=> brb, with the area of regedit.exe & the regpath we need to @ least take a peek @ on your end... next post below (done)! apk


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

Trog100:

Humor me, open up regedit.exe & look here:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management

In the left hand side pane... & in the right hand side pane, tell me what you have for THESE particular entries there:

PagingFiles
DisablePagingExecutive
ClearPageFileAtShutdown
LargeSystemCache
PagedPoolSize
PagedPoolQuota
NonPagedPoolSize
NonPagedPoolQuota
SystemPages



* Thanks, because iirc? THOSE ARE THE MAIN AREAS THAT CONTROL PAGEFILES, & also paging & memmgt, period...

*ALSO:*

This program may help:

*http://www.standards.com/Downloads/PageFileUsageMonitor.zip*

Read more about it, here:

http://www.standards.com/ThisAndThat/PageFileUsageMonitor.html

(I just ran it, it is pretty good, easy to use, and works... if anything will tell us? This SHOULD!)

Personally? I can think of no other way (other than performance monitor) to check WHERE you are actually paging to...

(Well, possibly tools like SysInternals diskmon, or filemon may help... but, I am NOT sure if they track pagefile accesses or not - I am fairly sure they don't but don't quote me on that!)

APK

P.S.=> Sorry for the delay, my neighbor & I have a "nightly chess game" every Tuesday, & today's THAT day... apk


----------



## CjStaal (Aug 16, 2006)

Also Trog, don't trust what your operating system is showing you while you browse your files, install DOS and take a look for yourself, there is alot more files than you think there is.


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

Cj_Staal said:


> Also Trog, don't trust what your operating system is showing you while you browse your files, install DOS and take a look for yourself, there is alot more files than you think there is.



He took off... what can you do? He'll be back most likely, as he is just as curious as I was @ this point most likely.



* I am ALL sort of curious now, as to WHERE he is paging to (because that much, we KNOW he is doing as much as the rest of us, via taskmgr.exe PROCESS TAB, pagefault column - which IS what paging is defined as, pagefaulting, & you don't just "page into thin air" OR "ram to ram")... 

At this point?

Well, I provided the registry areas to look over, & tools to use for monitoring WHERE he is paging to, but we have to wait him out is all.

APK


----------



## CjStaal (Aug 16, 2006)

No one should ever try to disprove Alecsstaar xD


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

Cj_Staal said:


> No one should ever try to disprove Alecsstaar xD



NO please DO disprove me... especially if/when I am wrong (it happens).

I only get "stronger" by it.

Mistakes, when I make 'em? Stick with me forever, especially in this lunacy (computers).

This time though, it's NOT "disproving me" but the information I got from MS' website (I go there usually when in doubt, for OS stuff, & coding)... this time, Trog100's case is making me doubt what I read here:

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=257758

His system is apparently DEFYING that... on all accounts. I have never seen that before, so I too, need to know what is going on!

I mean hey:  Where else do you go, but the "horses' mouth" (designer of the OS we use in this case), when you need ACCURATE info., typically?

(You know what I mean??)

The fact he is paging is probably making him @ least SOMEWHAT doubt that if you have 2gb or better, you don't page @ all... we've PROVEN he is, but to WHERE??

APK

P.S.=> This one though, admittedly? Is "flipping me out" in Trog100's case... it really is!

(& I magine he too, as we both began to get "frustrated" last page with one another's points)... 

As is, though, on what we DO know so far in his case?

I made my points a post or two back on this page about what we DO know (that he IS paging) but what we don't know is WHERE TO & you don't page to thin air, or RAM-to-RAM either!!! 

I put up tools that ought to help out, & also registry areas to look over on his end, but that is about all I can do... apk


----------



## CjStaal (Aug 16, 2006)

God, your my idol Alec


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

Cj_Staal said:


> God, your my idol Alec



LOL, honestly? BAD CHOICE!



APK

P.S.=> I am going to watch "Vanilla Sky" now, & take a break while waiting to see what Trog100 shows in the data from his registry & maybe a screenshot from that pagefile monitoring app I put a link up to above... apk


----------



## trog100 (Aug 16, 2006)

he he he.. i took off cos u appeared have taken off alec.. but i will do as u say.. and i aint trying to disprove anything.. simply puzzle out the conflcting evidence i am seeing..

i also accept that alex is way over my head techno wise..  but when my own tests i run conflict with what i should be seeing i believe what i see not what i should see..

for years i have played with my swopfile based on what i read.. now i have reached my own conclusions and say no matter what i do with it my own personal experience tells me that with todays common large amount of ram.. its all redundant..

one problem is windows itself..  when u mess with its virtual memory it refers to something called its pagefile.. one assumes it means the disk based part of its virtual memory..  when u look into task manager it refers to its pagefile again and tells u how much is in use..

this is where it all starts to get confusing.. i assumed pagefile in use meant its disk based memory.. i think most people do.. but from tests i run even when i dont have one i get exactly the same pagefile in use message in task manager..

i dont believe for one second that windows is creating an invisible one of gig or so in size so it seems windows is simply refering to memory in use not the disk based part..

my conclusion as to how it works goes like this.. windows doesnt know the difference tween its physical memory and its disk based memory..  to windows its all system memory.. i also believe it pages out to spare memory of any kind but only seems to use its disk based memory when the real stuff is lacking..

this of course conflicts with all i have read about windows and its memory.. incidentally i still have no pagefile.sys or the temp file.. nothing strange has happened.. 

just goona look in my reg thingy..

back in a tick..

trog


----------



## trog100 (Aug 16, 2006)

Pagingfiles     no data when double clicked.. nothing in it..

DisablePagingExecutive     value 0

ClearPageFileAtShutdown    value 0

LargeSystemCache        value 0

PagedPoolSize       value 0

PagedPoolQuota     value 0

NonePagedPoolSize    value 0

NonePagedPoolQuota    value 0

SystemPages     value 303000

###

the rest..

SessionPoolSize   value 4

SessionViewSize   value 30

WriteWatch     value 1

SecondLevelDataCache   value 0

if i have missed any they have nothing in them or have a value of 0

lots of zeroes it seems.. 

just gonna download and try the pagemonitor zip

trog


----------



## CjStaal (Aug 16, 2006)

that's what I get


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

trog100 said:


> my conclusion as to how it works goes like this.. windows doesnt know the difference tween its physical memory and its disk based memory..  to windows its all system memory..



BINGO, that is EXACTLY right... I said early on in this thread, if you care to look? It's ALL "VIRTUAL MEMORY" to Windows... both your RAM in chips AND on disk in pagefiles!



trog100 said:


> i also believe it pages out to spare memory of any kind but only seems to use its disk based memory when the real stuff is lacking..



Interesting... & this is the part that makes NO SENSE to me @ all, honestly! It defies what paging is about, paging to disk based pagefile.sys, OR the temppf.sys (which you & I have discussed extensively from the data on the MS page I referred us to).



trog100 said:


> this of course conflicts with all i have read about windows and its memory.. incidentally i still have no pagefile.sys or the temp file.. nothing strange has happened..



It does... & it is REALLY "bugging  me". It defies most all I have learned in this field regarding how Virtual Memory utilizing OS' work in fact.



trog100 said:


> just goona look in my reg thingy..
> 
> back in a tick..
> 
> trog



Yes, please do... & DO TRY THAT LITTLE APP I note above!

(Easy to use, it does work, & has a full write up on it as well on the lower url below its download linkage)

Put up screenshots from it possibly if you would.

Thanks!

APK

P.S.=> Maybe, JUST MAYBE, we'll all learn a NEW THING here, & that is, what it is all about imo @ least, after all... apk


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

*Trog100: NO PAGINGFILES entry @ all?*

Trog100: NO PAGINGFILES entry in the registry there @ all?

APK


----------



## trog100 (Aug 16, 2006)

the little monitor thing thing dosnt tell me anything either except the time.. i ran it for ten minutes or so.. loaded and unloaded 1.4 gig of a game called fear.. ran around for a couple of minutes.. loaded and unloaded.. maxed and minimmized a few apps.. all it updated was the time.. perhaps i am useing it wrong..

i am still running no page file.. perhaps windows really does mean no pageing when u tell it no pagefile..??

trog


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

WoW... man, admittedly, @/by this point, on your case here?

I am stumped... 



* Just plain-jane, flat out stumped... & I do NOT like that!

Sorry man!

I don't have the answer to this one, & unless you can get ahold of an app that monitors pagefile interrupts, or rather paging interrupts in your case (since you have NO pagefile, & that little app SHOULD have cut it, imo, & does when you actually DO have a pagefile.sys present)? 

Heck - I don't know HOW to trace/track where it is you are paging to, offhand... This one's going to 'bug me' for a long time until I get the answer to it.

(I sort of REFUSE to believe that when you cross the 2-4gb memory bearing mark in an OS, you page "Ram to Ram" (that defeats the typical/normal design of Virtual Memory utilizing OS' of which Windows NT-based OS, are))!

ARGH!!! We DO KNOW that you page, but to where?

APK

P.S.=> This is SO "freaky", but eventually, an answer will come out somehow, it always does & in keeping w/ the flick I am watching?

IT WILL BE A "REVOLUTION OF THE MIND"! 

Now, back to "Vanilla Sky", one of my FAV flicks... apk


----------



## trog100 (Aug 16, 2006)

do i page.. ????..  if i do i think it is ram to ram.. its the only logical conclusion i can arrive at.. 

if u want any screen shots of my system settings or bits and bobs i can soon post em..

trog


----------



## CjStaal (Aug 16, 2006)

Well still, putting the paging file on a different partition yeilded increases in performances for me. and I am running 2gigs of ram also.


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

The only thing I can think of, is that it forms tiny temp files on your disk, & uses them AS needed, & fries them later... right after the OS is done using them.

Possibly TOO FAST for us to see/detect though... I don't know!

So... please, do me a favor: ONE last thing to test/check!

Open a DOS prompt, type SET & then press enter.

Once it puts out its data? Tell me where your %TEMP% or %TMP% is... 

That is most likely WHERE these files I think are being used, will be written/read from... trick is, how long do they 'stick around' & will we be able to see them (if in fact, this IS the case)

APK

P.S.=> What "SET" does is display (or set new ones, like in a batchfile, to override existing ones or make new ones JUST for that particular instance of commands you run) your systemwide "environment" variables, which is handed to EVERY program when it runs, sort of an "in-memory .ini file"... 

& the TEMP/TMP vars are just that: Where temporary operations are typically done, unless an application sets its own (like WinZip can)... apk


----------



## trog100 (Aug 16, 2006)

had to google to find how to get dos prompt.. he he.. brain like a sieve..

i am now gonna delete the lot of em and see what happens.. i will leave the window open and hit fresh often..

trog


----------



## trog100 (Aug 16, 2006)

nope dosnt seem to be there..

i kinda like a story i once read.. the explanation for how radio theory worked.. the "wave" theory.. just like waves moving thru water it went..

some clever bugger after a while said waves move thru a medium.. like water or air.. how does it work in space..????

hmm said the scientists.. after much scratching of heads they invented a none existing medium called the "aether".. this is the medium said the scientists.. it must exists cos our theory says it needs to.. we cant have the none existence of a medium buggering up our nice "wave" theory..

he he he

trog


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

Well, we are "lost in the ether" then...

(We are unable to make a determination of where it is you are paging to, period it seems @ this point)



* This IS going to bother me for some time... I don't like being "dumbfounded/stumped" @ all...

APK

P.S.=> Sorry I was unable to narrow this down for you... it happens! IF you do somehow find this out? Please, let me know, or point me to forums where you DO discover this... thanks! apk


----------



## trog100 (Aug 16, 2006)

i will check around for further info alec.. i dont hold much hope.. i think u know my conclusions which i arrived at thru my own observations.. i have/had been useing the little minimim 200 size pagefile just to go along with the common theory.. 

giving u more respect then i do most when u told me i was wrong.. its not uncommon when u go against commonly held beliefs.. i have run all the tests we can think of and posted the results.. so far nothing we have done has disproved my original conclusions.. that given enough physical memory windows dosnt seem to need or use the disk based variety.. 

i still accept the possibility of it needing disk based memory but all the tests i have run tend to suggest otherwise.. i also favour the idea that it simply pages to its physical memory.. 

it leaves me with a bit of a problem also when i poke my nose into pagfile threads and tell folks what they have read is all outdated rubbish based on machines of yesterday that rarely if ever had enough of the real stuff.. and dosnt really apply to a machine belonging to the cheap ram era..

but threads like this are where the real information comes from.. i hope this one at least makes people wonder about windows and how it uses its memory..

trog


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

trog100 said:


> i will check around for further info alec.. i dont hold much hope.. i think u know my conclusions which i arrived at thru my own observations.. i have/had been useing the little minimim 200 size pagefile just to go along with the common theory..



I have @ this point, & others THINK as I did, that Windows creates tiny random.tmp files on the disk, someplace (in keeping, sort of, with my idea of the %TEMP%/%TMP% being the area this is done in, possibly TOO fast for us to see them used, & then deleted).

They may have been in the "root" (\.) of C: in fact, where the normal pagefile.sys forms, we never looked there, but they may occur TOO FAST for us to see (used/deleted cycle) as well, we don't know either way.

BUT, there was no proof there either for your idea or mine so far when others thought as I did (small tmp files on disk for paging)... it was on a forums like this one, & they didn't even ATTEMPT to analyze it as you & I had.



trog100 said:


> giving u more respect then i do most when u told me i was wrong.. its not uncommon when u go against commonly held beliefs..



BUT, you haven't proven yourself RIGHT, either... & neither have I, in your case @ least!

I have shown you this much though: You ARE paging... 

& when OS of the VM utilizing design page? They use disks. 

Now, afaik? They do NOT page "ram-to-ram", because that defeats the purposes of Virtual Memory period.

(& about going against commonly held beliefs? I do that quite a bit, were you to search my name online... I've gotten into some HUGE "battles" in that regard, lol, over time online).

Still, when it comes to "questioning the horses mouth" (Microsoft, the designer of this OS), that's when I get VERY LEERY of doing it - they did, after all, create this OS we use.



trog100 said:


> i have run all the tests we can think of and posted the results..



No, I have another... I will put it in my P.S. & hint @ it as I go in my reply to you here! 

That test SHOULD tell us, what is what, I would think. 

Fact is:  We ALMOST hit it!

However, you didn't do the one test we should have. 

You completely BURNED your pagefile.sys, but you never made a 1mb sized one (or as small as Windows LETS you make one)... 

Try it, there is a good reason for testing that way, I will get into it in my P.S.!



trog100 said:


> so far nothing we have done has disproved my original conclusions.. that given enough physical memory windows dosnt seem to need or use the disk based variety..



BUT, you are paging, that much I proved to you... question is? Where to??

You can't prove it's "Memory-to-Memory" & I can't prove it's "Memory-to-RANDOMTEMPFILES-ondisk" either... @ least, in testing as we did, so far.

("Rock & A HARD PLACE!")

BUT, we're going to CHANGE that... read on!



trog100 said:


> i still accept the possibility of it needing disk based memory but all the tests i have run tend to suggest otherwise.. i also favour the idea that it simply pages to its physical memory..



Which defeats the typical operation of a virtual memory based OS... but, it could be possible, you never know (dumb, but possible).

You didn't try the 1 test we still need to - a SUPER SMALL physically diskbound located pagefile.sys (smallest Windows lets you make)... there's a reason for it, we want to see if when it is as TINY as you can make it, IF IT GROWS.

That will prove to us that it uses disk for the most part, when your explorer.exe pages (which we KNOW it does, as do your apps like winamp.exe when minimized).



trog100 said:


> it leaves me with a bit of a problem also when i poke my nose into pagfile threads and tell folks what they have read is all outdated rubbish based on machines of yesterday that rarely if ever had enough of the real stuff.. and dosnt really apply to a machine belonging to the cheap ram era..



It belongs to the design foundation of these OS' we use though, they are Virtual Memory Operating systems.



trog100 said:


> but threads like this are where the real information comes from.. i hope this one at least makes people wonder about windows and how it uses its memory..
> 
> trog



True... now, time to outline what to do to test this all out! The one test we missed... IF THIS TINY PAGEFILE.SYS grows? We KNOW you use disk, when you page, and WE KNOW YOU PAGE YOUR APPS already, that much I proved.

*NOW, LET'S GET THE REAL ANSWERS (hopefully) YOU & I ARE LOOKING FOR!*

(You've provided such an ODD scenario, I want the answers! lol...)

APK

P.S.=>*LAST EXPERIMENT TO PERFORM (we never did this one):*

Make the SMALLEST pagefile.sys Windows lets you make, under 12 mb as far as you can go, & then, start running things on your system... 

I want to see, if say for instance, a 1mb pagefile.sys (IF POSSIBLE) will grow on you over there... 

This alone will PROVE well enough, that even IF you have 2-4gb of RAM, you use a pagefile.sys because we DO KNOW you page, via pagefaults generating on explorer.exe constantly, & apps like winamp.exe when you minimize it/restore its window...

While doing it? 

REALLY "push your system around" & bring TONS of programs into memory, with the biggest data you can find (most likely your biggest game & tons of instances of other apps you use)... 

This is, the TRUE test, imo! 

HOWEVER: You have to have enough programs + data in RAM to exceed your 2gb in RAM chips though...

(Because, We already KNOW you page, but where is the question & thinking it pages "Ram-to-Ram" is sort of outrageous, because the OS itself just is NOT designed that way. It is designed to use diskspace as "fake RAM" as you called it.)

Try that... get back to us! apk


----------



## trog100 (Aug 16, 2006)

loading more data than i have room for in physical ram made my small-ish 200 meg pagefile grow.. this has never been in dispute.. this to me just backs up my "only uses its pagefile when it has to theory"..

i know my system during normal usage and that includes some very memory hungry games.. the most memory hungry games in fact.. never made my 200 meg minimum size one grow.. 

there is the possibility that windows was busy paging away to my 200 meg file on a smallish scale and my assumption that because it didnt grow in size it wasnt being used was wrong..

i will see how small a one i can set.. but even if a 1 meg one dosnt grow.. windows could still be useing it on a very small scale..

how small would it have to be before we can except the fact it isnt being used cos it dosnt grow in size.. ??

before i do this by the way i am pretty sure it wont grow however small.. but if it dosnt grow.. the fact it has one set to a minimum size should put paid to any suggestion of it creating any other ones..

one thing is clear to me.. if it dosnt grow in size and windows is useing it.. it aint exactly shoving much data into it..  

trog

ps.. something interesting just happend.. i just tried a min of 2 meg and max of 2000 meg.. windows does seem to say amin of 2 meg.. when i went back to the desk top i got the error message "windows is increasing the size of your swop file cos it aint big enough"..

more odd behaviour in my book.. windows seems happy not to have one but dosnt like a min 2 meg one..

it has given me a 44.032 k one.. it also did this without a reboot.. basically it is ignoring my 2 meg and giving me 43 meg one.. i will try and get a smaller one..


----------



## trog100 (Aug 16, 2006)

just tried a 2 and 200 meg one.. this time it tells me i have to reboot.. it has now given me a 2 gig one.. he he he

i will make sure it gets removed and try again..

trog

ps.. okay gonna give up on this.. windows behaves in an irrational way when u try and get a very small pagfile.sys created.. i have had anything produced from 2 gig down to 10 meg.. 10 meg isnt small enough to prove much..

let me come at this from a different angle.. in control panel.. windows lets u customize its pagefile.. i am gonna have to assume it means the disk based part of its system memory.. a different meaning than in task manager which seems to refer to system memory of any kind when it says pagefile in use..

okay why does windows quite clearly give u the no pagfile option.. by pagefile i assume it means the disk based part of its virtual memory.. it is that which is being altered after all..

i would suggest the answer to this is very simple.. it means exactly what it says.. windows will function or attempt to function without useing the disk based part of its virtual memory..

i think we are chasing ghosts alec.. we cant find a pagefile temp or otherwise because contrary to popular belief there isnt one.. when windows says no pagfile it means exactly what it says..

trog


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 16, 2006)

trog100 said:


> just tried a 2 and 200 meg one.. this time it tells me i have to reboot.. it has now given me a 2 gig one.. he he he



Yes... & I'd wager that NOW, you may have a temppf.sys (temp pagefile.sys) under %WinDir%\System32 (%systemroot) as the page from MS has been stating as well.

Maybe you can check on that now as well.



trog100 said:


> ps.. okay gonna give up on this.. windows behaves in an irrational way when u try and get a very small pagfile.sys created..



It behaves exactly as is noted on that MS page you felt was "out of date rubbish/bullshit" apparently.



trog100 said:


> okay why does windows quite clearly give u the no pagfile option.. by pagefile i assume it means the disk based part of its virtual memory.. it is that which is being altered after all..



Well, again as I have stated - to Windows? Disk based pagefile.sys &/or temppf.sys + your RAM IN CHIPS, is ALL VIRTUAL MEMORY.



trog100 said:


> i would suggest the answer to this is very simple.. it means exactly what it says.. windows will function or attempt to function without useing the disk based part of its virtual memory..



Oh, of course... if you don't exhaust the RAM in chips first. Except that, we STILL haven't figured out WHERE winamp & Explorer.exe were paging to, when you DIDN'T have a pagefile.sys!



trog100 said:


> i think we are chasing ghosts alec.. we cant find a pagefile temp or otherwise because contrary to popular belief there isnt one.. when windows says no pagfile it means exactly what it says..
> 
> trog



Well, the only thing I question is, when you had NO pagefile.sys period? Where then, was explorer.exe paging to? 

After all:

We both verified, it INDEED, is paging via taskmgr.exe PAGEFAULTS column in the PROCESSES tab, as well as winamp as well when you min/restored its window.

APK

P.S.=> Ever think you & I may have found a "bug/hole" in the OS design? It's possible... apk


----------



## trog100 (Aug 17, 2006)

when i was checking the size of the pagefile windows gave me.. i wasnt going by the amount stated in the control panel by the way.. i was looking at the actual size of the pagefile.sys file windows created in my C drive root..

"Well, the only thing I question is, when you had NO pagefile.sys period? Where then, was explorer.exe paging to?"

if my way of seeing it is correct when its been told not to use the disk based part of its virtual memory (no pagefile is set) it simply pages out to whatever spare physical memory is there.. in my case there is always spare physical memory there for it to use.. in a system where there wasnt spare physical memory for it to use it wouldnt function..

once u accept the fact that windows by its very nature dosnt need disk based memory it can make do with just physical if told to..  it all fits and there is no puzzle..

i am back to the "no pagefile" setting now by the way..

changeing the subject.. i like your ramdisk idea but i think it would all work better if u increased your physical ram from 512 meg.. i can see your logic in thinking u dont need it.. but..??? 

trog

ps.. going away for a week boating.. if i dont sink i should be back after.. he he


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 18, 2006)

trog100 said:


> when i was checking the size of the pagefile windows gave me.. i wasnt going by the amount stated in the control panel by the way.. i was looking at the actual size of the pagefile.sys file windows created in my C drive root..
> 
> "Well, the only thing I question is, when you had NO pagefile.sys period? Where then, was explorer.exe paging to?"
> 
> if my way of seeing it is correct when its been told not to use the disk based part of its virtual memory (no pagefile is set) it simply pages out to whatever spare physical memory is there.. in my case there is always spare physical memory there for it to use.. in a system where there wasnt spare physical memory for it to use it wouldnt function.



Assuming you are correct, you run the risk of system (OS) &/or application crash, which you state is a possibility when using NO pagefile.sys... a risk I personally cannot take for how I use my machines.

Still, I think the theory of Windows using small tmp files for paging to disk when no pagefile.sys is present (such as in the case of explorer.exe paging which we did on your system & verified as true, &/or your winamp.exe doing the same when min/restore of its window) is the more likely - because this is the design of this OS family, & many others that use Virtual Memory utilizing designs.

BUT, you & I have no proof, either way (unfortunately).

I can see your point, it is possible, but imo? Sort of impractical, because you run the risk of crash/abend/errs.



trog100 said:


> once u accept the fact that windows by its very nature dosnt need disk based memory it can make do with just physical if told to..  it all fits and there is no puzzle..



It fits, but runs the risk of system (OS) &/or applications abends/errs/crashes. BUT, then again, the theory that using small temp files for paging of explorer.exe (constantly paging) may be a possible too...

We have no answers here, & neither does anyone else studying this online that I have seen, thusfar.



trog100 said:


> changeing the subject.. i like your ramdisk idea but i think it would all work better if u increased your physical ram from 512 meg.. i can see your logic in thinking u dont need it.. but..???
> 
> trog



It works, as is, & has given me no trouble thusfar... & SHOULD be even faster, once that DDRDrive x1 PCI-e model of a SSD for the masses releases, given that it uses faster memory & a larger bandwidth bus type than my CENATEK RocketDrive (PC-133 SDRAM memory & PCI 2.2 bus) does.



trog100 said:


> ps.. going away for a week boating.. if i dont sink i should be back after.. he he



Have fun, & it was an INTERESTING experiment/study here, albeit a pity we did not get SOLID answers on either account (other than you WILL crash/abend/errout if you run out of RAM using your "no pagefile.sys" setup IF you exhaust your RAM in chips).

APK

P.S.=> Sorry for delay in reply, Wed. & Thurs.? Tough to fit in forums-stuff for me, as those are days my friends & I take off & "enjoy the real world" outside of "the Matrix" here, lol...

Anyhow/anyways:

You & I, we have SORT OF diverged also into a very "shades-of-gray" area in the sizings of pagefiles as well (one where imo @ least? There are some very valid ways of doing that, based on RAM onboard your mobo in chips & also HOW YOU USE YOUR MACHINE... & it always boils down to that!)... & there is little question about performance gains, IF you use a pagefile.sys that is (safety net in ANY configuration against crashes), about placements however.

Sizing pagefiles:  It's one of the most "hotly debated topics" I have ever seen online in fact, as I mention earlier on in this thread... apk


----------



## Alec§taar (Aug 27, 2006)

*Been "reading up" on this... here is what I think you are seeing Trog100*

Trog100:

(ALSO, per our last discussion/analysis above: I think I know why you're showing paging on explorer.exe too now, by the by, even though you don't use a pagefile.sys period - CacheMgr subsystem can cause paging by the memmgr kernel subsystem )

I.E.-> Those 2 subsystems & the filesystem driver: They DO work massively close together, & especially depending on if a read is read in as noncached, or cached, but in YOUR case (no pagefile.sys use, & 2gb of RAM online)?

It's not paging in/out data from a pagefile.sys, but from data files it reads AND from data itself for itself in the "VACB" (more on that later) & when changed? You see paging from explorer.exe in taskmgr.exe PROCESS tab with pagefaults column visible! Sounds "weird" I know, but read on:

Hence the cached vs. uncached read-in data which can be marked thus by apps!

E.G. -> The Cache/Memmgr/FileSystem Driver are "punching back" files/data read in & used by Explorer.exe & also its OWN "VACB" data, memory to memory in YOUR case, since no pagefile.sys is present (if memmgr driven, & it will be since the cachemgr can force this or the filesystem driver, to the VACB (or from 512mb max size afaik cache array/buffer), but, will "hit disk" 'paging' on cached lazy writes)!

& if they change? 

They are marked as "dirty" in the cache, & the VACB has to note it also (the allocated area for an app in VIRTUAL MEMORY & THE OS SEES IT ALL AS THAT, RAM IN CHIPS + PAGEFILE.SYS if present), & pushed back to file they used, BY THE MEMORY MGT SUBSYSTEM, in the data cached in from said files & THEN, changed! 

Since the cachemgr, &/or FileSystem driver may be 'forcing' writes by the memmgr, it is being shown as PAGING on your end, via VACB changes of data while cached, & it is paging memory-to-memory (VACB is a buffer, a VM buffer, & since you have NO PAGEFILE.SYS? IT IS PAGING MEMORY TO MEMORY, until the filesystem + cache do a "lazy write" back to disk & the files data used was changed)!

(It's a WEE BIT DIFFERENT THOUGH, in the case of a file being shared by more than 1 app! That is when "copy on write" goes into effect when 1 instance of an app, changes the data file being shared too, making sure BOTH APPS HAVE THE DATA UPDATED while a file is shared). 

THIS IS WHY (ALSO) WHEN YOU MINIMIZED WINAMP.EXE THERE PER MY TEST FOR YOU? IT TOO WAS SHOWING PAGING imo, albeit paging memory to memory to the VACB buffer, until (if needed) lazy written by memmgr forced to do so my Cachemgr requests on lazy writes - thus, the memmgr takes over, & when it does a write to disk, even to a data file it used? It will/is showing as "PAGING"!

* So far, it seems to make sense in YOUR case, where you do NOT use a pagefile.sys, & have 2gb of RAM online!

(This is good for your use patterns @ least, UNTIL YOU HIT A DATASET OR TOO MANY APPS IN RAM (which we tested & you began seeing hassles, but NOT your usual use pattern there but instead really "PUSHING" your system per my instructions to test that out) THAT OVERFLOWS IT, you can crash the OS or apps, but a risk you take only & CAN avoid).



* Sound about "write" (lol, pun intended)...?

APK

P.S.=> Memmgt, & cachemgr + file system driver interaction? IMO, one of the HARDEST THINGS TO GRASP about Windows... apk


----------

