Can't set pagefile beyond 2047 MB

[Guest]

I have 2 GB worth of physical memory and 1 physical drive with 1 partition
because I don't have the need for a second partition. Windows recommends
using pagefile setting of 3070 MB, but sets my pagefile to 2047 MB regardless
of what setting I use, unless I choose not to have a pagefile. I have tried
using 2048 MB to match the currrent amount of physical RAM, and it still
won't set it to 2047 MB. I have tried using 4096, but Windows won't let me
set it beyond 4095, which I know is a physical limitation on the OS per
partition. I know it's a moot point since I have 2 GB worth of physical
memory, but I'm baffled here and have to have an answer to the equation
before me. I would rather not use anything at all, but I know a pagefile is
necessary. I just keep thinking that I'm missing out on the maximum
performance I can get out of this laptop since my pagefile setting is lower
than what the system is recommending. Any thoughts?

 

[Rock]

I have 2 GB worth of physical memory and 1 physical drive with 1 partition
because I don't have the need for a second partition. Windows recommends
using pagefile setting of 3070 MB, but sets my pagefile to 2047 MB regardless
of what setting I use, unless I choose not to have a pagefile. I have tried
using 2048 MB to match the currrent amount of physical RAM, and it still
won't set it to 2047 MB. I have tried using 4096, but Windows won't let me
set it beyond 4095, which I know is a physical limitation on the OS per
partition. I know it's a moot point since I have 2 GB worth of physical
memory, but I'm baffled here and have to have an answer to the equation
before me. I would rather not use anything at all, but I know a pagefile is
necessary. I just keep thinking that I'm missing out on the maximum
performance I can get out of this laptop since my pagefile setting is lower
than what the system is recommending. Any thoughts?

In theory, the more memory you have, and you have a lot, the less page
file space will be used. Certain apps take some page file space for
their own use even though they shouldn't, but for the most part this
theory is what works in practice. Read about virtual memory and how to
set the page file in Alex Nichol's excellent article,
http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm. XP's recommendations are out of line
when there is a large amount of memory in the system. You might want
start with an initial size of 50 or 100 MB and set a maximum of 1024 or
2048. XP won't take that much. It will just take what it needs.


You can use Bill James' utility to monitor page file use and see how
much your system is actually using. The numbers provided by XP in task
manager are deceptive. Get it from here: http://www.dougknox.com/ in
the Win XP Utilities section, "XP Page File Monitoring Utility."

 

[Larry(LJL269)]

C 'Setting VM with WinXP-2K_Pagefile.vbs' of 12/16/04
for what stats mean & how PF operates & implications to
OS with RAM>1GB. NOT lite reading tho

HTH-Larry

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:59:01 -0800, Rock

| Read about virtual memory and how to
|set the page file in Alex Nichol's excellent article,
|http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm. XP's recommendations are out of line
|when there is a large amount of memory in the system. You might want
|start with an initial size of 50 or 100 MB and set a maximum of 1024 or
|2048. XP won't take that much. It will just take what it needs.
|
|
|You can use Bill James' utility to monitor page file use and see how
|much your system is actually using. The numbers provided by XP in task
|manager are deceptive. Get it from here: http://www.dougknox.com/ in
|the Win XP Utilities section, "XP Page File Monitoring Utility."

Any advise is my attempt to contribute more than I have received but I can only assure you that it works on my PC. GOOD LUCK.

 

[Alex Nichol]

I have 2 GB worth of physical memory and 1 physical drive with 1 partition
because I don't have the need for a second partition. Windows recommends
using pagefile setting of 3070 MB, but sets my pagefile to 2047 MB regardless
of what setting I use, unless I choose not to have a pagefile.

It is absurdly too much. You need a page file - principally to give a
'home' to pages of memory that have been allocated to programs but never
brought into use. I suggest an initial size 100 MB, Max maybe 1024 to
cover such contingencies. You will probably find if you check on the
super-hidden pagefile.sys in explorer that it never gets bigger than the
100. Read more at my page www.aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm

 

[Ken Blake]

In

what a ridiculous statement...in every regard.

Alex is under the impression that since he doesn't put his
memory
under pressure, nobody does.

No, Alex's statement is completely accurate.

foremost, there is NO penalty for having a pagefile that might
be too
big...

The only penalty is that it's waste of disk space. In these days
of very cheap large drives, that's a much smaller penalty than it
used to be, but it is a penalty.

there is a HUGE penalty for having one too small

Only if you prevent it from growing larger as needed.

plenty of people need MORE then two gig page file..ESPECIALLY
people
that have over a gig of memory

That's backwards. The more memory you have, the *less* page file
you need.

 

[Guest]

my statemensts stand

you wrote;
The only penalty is that it's waste of disk space"

that's correct and we agree on that...as I allready stated, my points are
for those that do not have a storage issue.

if there is no hardrive issue, there is absolutely no lowering the setting
from the default

you wrote;
[there is a penalty]""Only if you prevent it from growing larger as needed."

this is oncorrect in every sense...expansion is a hit a; by, when it was
invoked, and obviously since it might need to be invoked

in addition, by haing a smaller pagefile then the amount of memory in use, a
user will at times take private writable memory, (modified pages) out of
concideration for the memory manager.

obvioulsy, dlls and exe's would be unloaded in these situations instead of
the best candidate

you wrote;
[the idea that the more memory the bigger the pagefile]"That's backwards.
The more memory you have, the *less* page file
you need.

absolutely incorrect.

every bit of memory a user has in use needs backing on the hardrive.

the only users that don't need to increase the size of the pagefile when
they have more memory are the users that don't use the extra memory they
installed.

of course, there are users that install more memory then they use..these
users won't suffer a hit by lowering the default pagefile settings...but they
get absolutely no gain by doing it..,.and they DO risk a slow down in the
future

pretty simple;

since there is no penalty what so ever if the pagefile might be too big, DO
NOT MAKE THE SETTINGS LOWER THEN THE DEFAULT, unless you have a storage issue

pretty self evident

 

[Alex Nichol]

[the idea that the more memory the bigger the pagefile]"That's backwards.
The more memory you have, the *less* page file
you need.

absolutely incorrect.

For a given workload it is entirely correct.

You seem unable to understand that nothing is written into the page file
(other than a small amount the system seems to park there for
contingencies) until there is insufficient room in RAM. It is then used
for overflow. On large RAM this may be never - or it may be quite early
if the workload is very heavy. Hence the advice (which you will also
find in Ed Bott's 'Windows XP Inside out') to set initial size at 100
*in the first instance*. If the size of the file grows, update the
initial size accordingly, to cover all normal use.

every bit of memory a user has in use needs backing on the hardrive.

Now that *is* incorrect. The total VM allocation in use must be
contained in the sum of RAM and page file. As above - *nothing* is
written to page file until RAM overflows. If there is a significant page
file actual use, then RAM is marginally adequate at best - get more. Or
do not load so many things to sit around doing nothing.

Also realise that there is a total limit of virtual memory space set but
the underlying system memory model; RAM plus page file of more than 4GB
is certainly no use (apart from the case of Fast User Switching), and
more than 3 GB very dubious

the only users that don't need to increase the size of the pagefile when
they have more memory are the users that don't use the extra memory they
installed.

And so is that

And that is all I am going to say.

 

[R. McCarty]

You can actually monitor & test Pagefile usage with a couple of XP
tools. One, Perfmon.Msc will show you in %, total Pagefile usage.
You do have to add counters for Pagefile ( Usage, Peak Usage).
By using TaskMgr, Performance - you can monitor Memory usage
(The PF meter).
My system has 1.0 Gigabytes of memory, so take that into account
when reading the values presented below.
On my System I have a 128 Min Pagefile. When no applications
are running my PF meter runs at 187 Megabytes and the Pagefile %
will be at 11%. Under heavy loading (VPC, Word, Outlook, OE &
Streets & Trips) memory usage climbs to 527 Megabytes and the
Pagefile percentage climbs to 27% or 34 Megabytes of the Pagefile.
My VPC uses 256 megabytes for the Windows 2000 instance.
The point of all this is that as long as available Physical memory is
available to XP, it won't make extensive use of the Pagefile.
Because of memory requirements, I now recommend that all my
customers do not purchase a PC that has less than 512 Megabytes
of memory.
If you spend 30-45 minutes testing your own system, you can see
in real world terms how XP utilizes memory.

[the idea that the more memory the bigger the pagefile]"That's backwards.
The more memory you have, the *less* page file
you need.

absolutely incorrect.

For a given workload it is entirely correct.

You seem unable to understand that nothing is written into the page file
(other than a small amount the system seems to park there for
contingencies) until there is insufficient room in RAM. It is then used
for overflow. On large RAM this may be never - or it may be quite early
if the workload is very heavy. Hence the advice (which you will also
find in Ed Bott's 'Windows XP Inside out') to set initial size at 100
*in the first instance*. If the size of the file grows, update the
initial size accordingly, to cover all normal use.

every bit of memory a user has in use needs backing on the hardrive.

Now that *is* incorrect. The total VM allocation in use must be
contained in the sum of RAM and page file. As above - *nothing* is
written to page file until RAM overflows. If there is a significant page
file actual use, then RAM is marginally adequate at best - get more. Or
do not load so many things to sit around doing nothing.

Also realise that there is a total limit of virtual memory space set but
the underlying system memory model; RAM plus page file of more than 4GB
is certainly no use (apart from the case of Fast User Switching), and
more than 3 GB very dubious

the only users that don't need to increase the size of the pagefile when
they have more memory are the users that don't use the extra memory they
installed.

And so is that

And that is all I am going to say.

 

[Alex Nichol]

You can actually monitor & test Pagefile usage with a couple of XP
tools. One, Perfmon.Msc will show you in %, total Pagefile usage.
You do have to add counters for Pagefile ( Usage, Peak Usage).
By using TaskMgr, Performance - you can monitor Memory usage
(The PF meter).

It gives very misleading results. It gives the commit - all VM space
that might go in the file if it all came into use - which it almost
certainly won't. As such the values can easily by much larger than the
physical size of the file if you start with an initial value enough for
normal usage. Use instead the Page File Monitoring program, originally
by Bill James MVP and redone in a complied version by Doug Knox, at
http://www.dougknox.com/xp/utils/index.html. near bottom. which show the
amount of file that is actually doing something.

 

[Guest]

wow!..this was a great discussion!

Perris, great information, especially that article you linked to in your
first post.
I see your point, there isn't any reason to play with the settings, but I do
have to take one issue with you.

Even if a user has a storage issue, if their pagefile settings haven't been
touched, the default is "system managed".

The "system managed setting will automatically make the page file smaller if
storage becomes more of a concern then performance, therefore, Mr. nichole's
suggestion doesn't save hardrive area even for those people that need to save
the space.

There are people like Mr. Nichole like to trim "safe settings" so that
settings represent the "real world".

You on the other hand are gonzo on the other side of that position, you want
users to leave settings "safe".

I agree with your recomendations to most users, and since there isn't
anything lost in performance, this will be my advice for people in the future.