Parky 8 Posted July 27, 2011 Good question Parky. I've never really conducted any test with a static pagefile on the primary and have a another pagefile, dynamic or static, on the secondary. Interesting. This I may just have to check out one day. Something else to do...thanks. Always my pleasure to increase someone else's workload....... As for calling me "Doc"...please....I'm still trying to understand the nuances that make pagefile and swapfile different. plug_nickel Allow me to offer my humble assistance. The guy I'm about to quote seems to have some insight.... Swapfile Vs. Paging File We have all been using the terms swapfile and paging file interchangeably. Even Microsoft invariably refers to the paging file as the swapfile and vice versa. However, the swapfile and paging file are two different entities. Although both are used to create virtual memory, there are subtle differences between the two. The main difference lies in their names. Swapfiles operate by swapping entire processes from system memory into the swapfile. This immediately frees up memory for other applications to use. In contrast, paging files function by moving "pages" of a program from system memory into the paging file. These pages are 4KB in size. The entire program does not get swapped wholesale into the paging file. While swapping occurs when there is heavy demand on the system memory, paging can occur preemptively. This means that the operating system can page out parts of a program when it is minimized or left idle for some time. The memory used by the paged-out portions are not immediately released for use by other applications. Instead, they are kept on standby. If the paged-out application is reactivated, it can instantly access the paged-out parts (which are still stored in system memory). But if another application requests for the memory space, then the system memory held by the paged-out data is released for its use. As you can see, this is really quite different from the way a swapfile works. Swapfiles were used in old iterations of Microsoft Windows, prior to Windows 95. From Windows 95 onwards, all Windows versions use only paging files. Therefore, the correct term for the file used to create virtual memory in current operating systems is paging file, not swapfile. Because both swapfiles and paging files do the same thing - create virtual memory, people will always refer to swapfiles and paging files interchangeably. Let's just keep in mind their innate differences. Thanks to Matt Woodward of Ars Technica for that bit of info. It makes a reasonable amount of sense to me... Cheers, Parky Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
almccoyjr 7 Posted July 27, 2011 Always my pleasure to increase someone else's workload....... Allow me to offer my humble assistance. The guy I'm about to quote seems to have some insight.... Thanks to Matt Woodward of Ars Technica for that bit of info. It makes a reasonable amount of sense to me... As to the first comment: BYTE me. And for the second one, Thank you. Matt Woodward's assessment makes a whole lot of sense, especially when taking into account an OS's memory leakage rate and its affect on resources. plug_nickel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
almccoyjr 7 Posted July 31, 2011 Should the file be left on Drive C:? The slowest aspect of getting at a file on a hard disk is in head movement (‘seeking’). If you have only one physical drive then the file is best left where the heads are most likely to be, so where most activity is going on — on drive C:. If you have a second physical drive, it is in principle better to put the file there, because it is then less likely that the heads will have moved away from it. If, though, you have a modern large size of RAM, actual traffic on the file is likely to be low, even if programs are rolled out to it, inactive, so the point becomes an academic one. If you do put the file elsewhere, you should leave a small amount on C: — an initial size of 2MB with a Maximum of 50 is suitable — so it can be used in emergency. Without this, the system is inclined to ignore the settings and either have no page file at all (and complain) or make a very large one indeed on C: I've been thinking (often a very bad thing for me to do according to my wife) about this statement. Here's what I'm thinking about doing. Using Steam Mover to place both Progam/x86 folders on my secondary drive and putting a small, 100MB page file on primary. Then setup some kind of filter/logger to record what's happening in the page file. I'll place the page file as the 9th allocation after Windows. What do you think? Hey Von Paulus, BirDogICT; please chime in. Any suggestions? Filter/logger? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Von Paulus 8 Posted July 31, 2011 I don't know any logger which record the pagefile usage details. I've used this one once, but it's not very detailed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
almccoyjr 7 Posted July 31, 2011 Thanks VP. Pulled out an "old" disc of url's and loaded up a dangerous site : http://members.shaw.ca/bsanders/WindowsGeneralWeb/RAMVirtualMemoryPageFileEtc.htm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Parky 8 Posted July 31, 2011 I particularly like how the author of that article is candid enough to indicate that "There is quite a variety of ideas on this subject....". Without having done so, he'd be less than honest. I've read until my eyes were ready to fall out, about all the positive results you'll realize by manipulating the paging file area on your storage devices. I've also read about 1559 methods you could use to achieve a state of paging file nirvana. I've also experimented with it to a fair degree. My conclusions?? Simple....and I hate to sound like a broken record, but from my experience, the real tangible and positive results you'll see are negligible. Certainly not worth the time required to go through the diagnostics routines it takes to actually "optimize" the "paging" process. If I was running a Pentium II with 128 meg of RAM, and had rusty IDE cables connected to a hard drive that's platters spun at 33 1/3rd RPM, I might consider devoting further time to it.. On my current hardware and Windows 7-64Bit configuration, it's just not worth any consideration. I think most people with modern hardware and operating systems, should find that by letting Winblows manage those aspects of their hardware/software interactions, they'll have far more time for just gaming. It's a fascinating topic I suppose, but one that can also raise debates that seemingly could go on for an eternity. Why??? Simple.....because there is no real "set method" of optimizing page file operations on any given machine without the need for some very time consuming experimentation and fine-tweaking. Not from what I've read anyway, and certainly not from my own experience. As far as I'm concerned, it just ain't worth the time or effort.....lol. Not that I don't enjoy the more "technical" aspect of the thread, it's just that I don't feel a need to impress anyone here in particular......except may you, Doc. Cheers, Parky Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
almccoyjr 7 Posted July 31, 2011 ain't worth the time or effort.....lol. Not that I don't enjoy the more "technical" aspect of the thread, it's just that I don't feel a need to impress anyone here in particular......except may you, Doc. Parky There's that "frekkin" word Doc again. I really do like that "f" word. Much better than my "fuped". And after chewing on it for awhile, I agree with you. It really isn't worth the aggravation to setup that scenario and test it. And besides; if the page file is showing a lot of activity whenever you're doing anything on the pc, then something is causing a bottleneck impairing performance. No need to impress me. Yourself and many others on this forum do that naturally just in the "simple" well thought-out discussions on this forum. plug_nickel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Parky 8 Posted July 31, 2011 Doc..........erm.....ummm....I mean Al.... It's a rotten Sunday......I'm still off for two weeks. My bride of 30 years has to go back to work. Kinda' sux.......she's become a bit of a soulmate. Dunno wtf I'll do without her for the next couple of weeks. Cheers, Parky Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
