1. You are viewing our forum as a guest. For full access please Register. WindowsBBS.com is completely free, paid for by advertisers and donations.

Pagefile Size and Clearing

Discussion in 'Windows XP' started by Johanna, 2003/10/02.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 2003/10/02
    Johanna

    Johanna Inactive Alumni Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2003/03/08
    Messages:
    2,402
    Likes Received:
    2
    How big should a pagefile be, and how does one go about clearing it. In my search to find out what on earth has happened to my History files from IE, I noticed my pagefile is 1.63 Gigs. That seems like a lot. Suggestions? I read several definitions of the pagefile, and still don't really understand it.

    And, no, haven't recovered my History yet.

    Comp Specs: 40G WD HD, 2 partitions, 1G Memory (2 512 SDRAM)

    TIA
    Johanna
     
    Johanna,
    #1
  2. 2003/10/02
    Miz

    Miz Inactive Alumni

    Joined:
    2002/05/02
    Messages:
    2,345
    Likes Received:
    35
    A swap file (or in Windows NT/2000/XP, page file) is a space on a hard disk used as the virtual memory extension of a computer's real memory (RAM). Having a page file allows your computer's operating system to pretend that you have more RAM than you actually do. The least recently used files in RAM can be "swapped out" to your hard disk until they are needed later so that new files can be "swapped in" to RAM.

    Windows XP manages the page file quite well and for 99% of users, allowing XP to do the managing is the best approach. It will expand and contract the size of the pagefile as needed.

    There is a registry tweak available for download here that will ensure the page file is emptied when you shut down/restart the computer.
     
    Miz,
    #2


  3. to hide this advert.

  4. 2003/10/02
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    Johanna,

    The MS view on Paging Files here. Although the recommended size is 1.5 x RAM, many will disagree - shades of an interminable thread on the Board a few months ago!

    FYI - I use a fixed 1.5 GB Page File on a dedicated partition - running 1 Gb RAM. Rarely seem to use more than 400 Mb, but I have plenty of spare disk capacity and 2 drives.

    There is an advantage in having a fixed size Page File to prevent fragmentation. This is imperative if you run Photoshop with it's Scratch Disks - Photoshop's 'personal' page file - to avoid the two becoming mixed up.

    But as Miz says - for 99% of users just let Windows handle it.
     
    PeteC,
    #3
  5. 2003/10/02
    Christer

    Christer Geek Member Staff

    Joined:
    2002/12/17
    Messages:
    6,585
    Likes Received:
    74
    Johanna,

    when I installed Windows XP Professional, Windows didn´t set itself to manage the pagefile.
    With my 256MB RAM it set a minimum size of 384MB and a maximum size of 768MB. (1.5X and 3X respectively)

    I was discussing this subject in the thread mentioned by PeteC and questioned the huge pagefiles that come with large amounts of RAM and came to the conclusion that if I can get by with this setup, then I won´t need a larger pagefile when I buy another stick of 256MB RAM.

    I believe that the request from XP to have a pagefile of at least 1.5X RAM is to be able to handle a full memory dump in case of a system crash.
    I wouldn´t know what to do with such a dump so, on the recommendation of someone on this board, I´ve disabled that feature.

    Christer
     
    Last edited: 2003/10/02
    Christer,
    #4
  6. 2003/10/10
    JSS3rd Lifetime Subscription

    JSS3rd Geek Member

    Joined:
    2002/06/28
    Messages:
    2,221
    Likes Received:
    27
    Always an interesting subject, and everyone has an opinion (including moi :D).

    I also have 1 GB of RAM, and I've tried all three paging file options available: system managed, fixed size, and none at all. I don't use a system managed file because it's much larger than seems necessary, and I'm bothered by the fragmentation issue. No file worked perfectly for me until I tried to run a program (I've forgotten the name) that was designed to look for the file ... it refused to run, and displayed a message saying that it couldn't find the paging file.

    Now I use a fixed size paging file (a modest 256 MB) on a dedicated partition on my backup hard drive, and the problem has never recurred.
     
    Last edited: 2003/10/10
    JSS3rd,
    #5
  7. 2003/10/10
    Newt

    Newt Inactive

    Joined:
    2002/01/07
    Messages:
    10,974
    Likes Received:
    2
    One point to mention here. Unlike earlier OS versions, the defrag applet that ships with XP will defrag the page file. No idea how it does this magic on a running system but it seems to.

    I ran pagefiledefrag from www.sysinternals.com for years starting with NT4. Worked perfectly. But when I loaded it on XP, it always reported the pagefile to be in one or at worst 2 pieces. That is a drastic change from earlier OS versions so I did some searching and found out that yup, XP's defrag takes care of it.
     
    Newt,
    #6
  8. 2003/10/12
    Logik007

    Logik007 Inactive

    Joined:
    2003/10/04
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Logik007,
    #7
  9. 2003/10/13
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    An interesting read - yet another view on this contentious subject :)
     
    PeteC,
    #8
  10. 2003/10/13
    Christer

    Christer Geek Member Staff

    Joined:
    2002/12/17
    Messages:
    6,585
    Likes Received:
    74
    I agree with PeteC, very interesting reading.

    It sort of confirms my conclusion that the presence of 1GB of RAM doesn´t itself require a huge Pagefile. The requirements of the used applications and how XP allocates RAM and Pagefile to the applications does put requirements on the Pagefile.

    The comment "harddisk space is cheap nowadays" is true and a 1.5-3.0GB Pagefile is not a financial issue.

    When this topic was discussed previously, my main reason to NOT wanting a huge Pagefile was that it would be included in my Ghost Images of the System Partition.
    By that time I had not yet read the Ghost Manual ...... :eek: ...... and from Ghost 2003 "one session files ", such as pagefile.sys and hiberfil.sys, are excluded from the Image which makes my Ghost consideration a non-issue.

    When I installed XP, based on my 256MB RAM it set up a Pagefile of 384(-768)MB at the front of the System Partition. It has never grown larger than its minimum size and is located at the fastest portion of the harddisk.

    When I finally get around to buying another stick of 256MB RAM, XP will require a Pagefile twice the size, minimum and maximum.

    My thoughts are;

    will the new Pagefile remain in two equally sized parts, one of which in a not optimum location in the middle of the partition or,

    will the XP Defragger or Norton Speed Disk merge the two parts into one and if that is the case,

    will it be located at the optimum location at the front of the System Partition or will it be located somewhere in the middle where a contiguous chunk of free space is available?

    Christer
     
    Christer,
    #9
  11. 2003/10/13
    Newt

    Newt Inactive

    Joined:
    2002/01/07
    Messages:
    10,974
    Likes Received:
    2
    XP may want to make a bigger pagefile but speak sternly to it and disallow the growth.
     
    Newt,
    #10
  12. 2003/10/13
    Christer

    Christer Geek Member Staff

    Joined:
    2002/12/17
    Messages:
    6,585
    Likes Received:
    74
    Newt,
    that was my intention until I notice that XP starts to resize the pagefile. Only then will I let XP have it its way, MB by MB ...... :D ......

    By the way, this evening I did some house cleaning on my friends computer and altered the settings for the pagefile.

    It was set to be managed by XP and the analyze function of the XP defrag utility reported it to be in two fragments.

    After defragmentation using the XP utility, it was still in two fragments. This was not Your experience.

    I set it to 768-1536 after which "analyze" reported it to be in seven (7) fragments. A second defragmentation didn´t change anything, still seven fragments.

    It seems to me like the XP installer is equipped with a random generator ...... :rolleyes: ......

    Christer
     
    Last edited: 2003/10/13
    Christer,
    #11
  13. 2003/10/13
    Newt

    Newt Inactive

    Joined:
    2002/01/07
    Messages:
    10,974
    Likes Received:
    2
    Christer - with a really large page file, it may well be broken into a couple of chunks. XP should be smart enough to use the piece on the fastest part of the drive until that gets full which isn't likely. 7 sounds like a bit many though unless the drive is fragmented or low on free space.

    I set mine with the same min/max at OS install time and intend to keep it that way. So one chunk. I doubt I've used a significant part of the 1Gb but plenty of drive space so I'll leave well enough alone.

    You might want to try the free pagefile defragger from www.sysinternals.com and see if it can do any better. Maybe yes, maybe no, but harmless to try.
     
    Newt,
    #12
  14. 2003/10/14
    Christer

    Christer Geek Member Staff

    Joined:
    2002/12/17
    Messages:
    6,585
    Likes Received:
    74
    Newt,
    the drive has 30-35% free space and I defragmented before changing the size and management of the pagefile.
    This indicates to me that the defragger doesn´t consolidate free space and that a resized pagefile occupies any free space it finds.

    I installed XP on my friends computer too and being in a hurry I didn´t check everything. Until yesterday, I hadn´t noticed that his pagefile was set to XP managed.
    On all other installations it has become set with a min of 1.5xRAM and a max of 3.0xRAM.
    The "only" difference is that he chose to stay on FAT32 but all others are NTFS.

    Thanks for the link, I´ll try the utility.

    Christer
     
    Christer,
    #13
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Accept Learn More...