If you are wanting to reduce the size of the pagefile to save space, you
will be making a false economy.. performance will be affected.. better to
either replace the drive with a larger one or add a slave drive to your
system.. unless the drive is really quite old, I prefer to add a slave
drive..
If you are wanting to reduce the size of the pagefile to save space, you
will be making a false economy.. performance will be affected.. better to
either replace the drive with a larger one or add a slave drive to your
system.. unless the drive is really quite old, I prefer to add a slave
drive..
If you are wanting to reduce the size of the pagefile to save space, you
will be making a false economy.. performance will be affected.. better to
either replace the drive with a larger one or add a slave drive to your
system.. unless the drive is really quite old, I prefer to add a slave
drive..
This is a false generalization. In cases where you have more than
adequate memory for your requirements, the demand paging system actually
degrades performance. When I disabled the swap file in Win98SE I had a
huge improvement in performance. When I disabled the XP pagefile I
didn't get much of a change (but then I had only used XP for a day or
two total so don't have much to compare with).
All versions of Windows were designed to use a pagefile (swapfile).. filling
a drive to almost total capacity and having removed the swapfile will
definitely affect performance adversely.. In one of the reply posts to the
original posting is a link to a page that explains this..
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
