okay I'm letting windows manage it but why does it say 2337 mb size but when
you click change it says on the bottom recommended 3055mb?
Debbie

Hello, anyone going to answer?

Debbie

"Debbie Graham" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> okay I'm letting windows manage it but why does it say 2337 mb size but
> when you click change it says on the bottom recommended 3055mb?
> Debbie
>
>

the size will vary as needed when you check the 'allow windows to manage' or
such.
setting a fixed size will either cause you to run out of memory or waste
space.
Windows won't allow the size to get too small unless the swapfile drive runs
out of space.

--
A Professional Amateur...If anyone knew it all, none of would be here!
(E-Mail Removed)
Change Alpha to Numeric to reply
"Debbie Graham" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:O%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hello, anyone going to answer?
>
> Debbie
>
> "Debbie Graham" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> okay I'm letting windows manage it but why does it say 2337 mb size but
>> when you click change it says on the bottom recommended 3055mb?
>> Debbie
>>
>>
>
>

Oh Okay thanks

Debbie

"Not Me" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:e$(E-Mail Removed)...
> the size will vary as needed when you check the 'allow windows to manage'
> or such.
> setting a fixed size will either cause you to run out of memory or waste
> space.
> Windows won't allow the size to get too small unless the swapfile drive
> runs out of space.
>
> --
> A Professional Amateur...If anyone knew it all, none of would be here!
> (E-Mail Removed)
> Change Alpha to Numeric to reply
> "Debbie Graham" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:O%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hello, anyone going to answer?
>>
>> Debbie
>>
>> "Debbie Graham" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> okay I'm letting windows manage it but why does it say 2337 mb size but
>>> when you click change it says on the bottom recommended 3055mb?
>>> Debbie
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

I have seen many opinions & reasons for doing it many different ways.
Personally, I don't think having a min/max set for the swap file is a good
idea.
Having a maximum size means you 'could' run out of room in the swap file.
Having a minimum size means the file won't be completely removed/replaced at
bootup.
To me that means the possibility, however small, that the swap file could
save corrupt data.
On this machine, I have a relatively small (30GB) EIDE 7200 HDD that I like
to use as my swap file drive.
I put nothing else on it and allow Windows to manage the size.
That way it is not slowed by anything else being accessed/written to the
drive.

"AvatarOfTheShip" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> Pagefiles are a subject that seems to arouse disproportionate wrath and
> ire - sort of like the Mac/PC controversy but without (most of) the
> religious overtones. Should you normalize your your pagefile (ie set the
> upper and lower bound the same)? Should all or part of it be on another
> spindle (hard drive) - NOT partition? Where do you stand on the
> Fragmentation issue and why? Well, I would say normalize and if you feel
> like it do the spindle thing too. How's that for fence-sitting?arty:
>
>
> --
> AvatarOfTheShip