Picking drive for the hibernation file

[harryguy082589]

Hi,

I am setting up my new instillation of windows xp with numerous
partitions to sort out my files and one of these partitions is only for
temp files. I have been able to move my pagefile and all of the temp
folders onto this partition, but I cant get the hibernation file to
move. Any ideas how?

Thanks in advance,

Dan

 

[Rick \Nutcase\ Rogers]

Hi Dan,

Simply put: You can't. Hiberfil.sys *must* remain on the system partition.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Associate Expert - WindowsXP Expert Zone

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

 

[Carey Frisch [MVP]]

The hibernation file must remain on the same partition as
the Windows XP operating system. Do not attempt to move
it to another partition as it will cease to function as designed.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User
Microsoft Newsgroups

Be Smart! Protect Your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.mspx

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

:

| Hi,
|
| I am setting up my new instillation of windows xp with numerous
| partitions to sort out my files and one of these partitions is only for
| temp files. I have been able to move my pagefile and all of the temp
| folders onto this partition, but I cant get the hibernation file to
| move. Any ideas how?
|
| Thanks in advance,
|
| Dan
|

 

[José Gallardo]

Moreover, to place pagefile in another partition doesn't improve the performance. It's better to place it in another hard disk (when provided).

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

This layout will degrade the performance of your system unless you use a
second hard drive. Putting the pagefile on a partition on the same spindle
just increases the travel distances for the heads. To be effective you want
two hard drives each on a different controller channel. If you used this
layout for Win98 and thought you were enhancing performance, you were
actually slowing the system down. Sorry.

 

[Stan Brown]

The hibernation file must remain on the same partition as
the Windows XP operating system. Do not attempt to move
it to another partition as it will cease to function as designed.

Out of curiosity, what happens if I delete it while Windows XP is
running normally? Is anything crried over from one hibernation
period to te next, or is the file created anew each time the
computer goes into hibernation?

 

[harryguy082589]

Sorry if i wasn't clear, it is two seprate hard drives

This layout will degrade the performance of your system unless you use a
second hard drive. Putting the pagefile on a partition on the same spindle
just increases the travel distances for the heads. To be effective you want
two hard drives each on a different controller channel. If you used this
layout for Win98 and thought you were enhancing performance, you were

actually slowing the system down. Sorry.

--
Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
(Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)

Hi,

I am setting up my new instillation of windows xp with numerous
partitions to sort out my files and one of these partitions is only for
temp files. I have been able to move my pagefile and all of the temp
folders onto this partition, but I cant get the hibernation file to
move. Any ideas how?

Thanks in advance,

Dan

 

[Pop]

But, but, but ...
I thought it was agreed, the pafefile had to be in the same partition as the
os. If that's so, then why the pro/con dialog re multiple physical drives?

At first it all made sense, then this sidetrip confused everything.

Sorry if i wasn't clear, it is two seprate hard drives

===> Umm, sorry, as you say, but it didn't necessarily "slow" the system
down; it may have NOT changed system speed overall, but it didn't HAVE to
have slowed the system down unless you are counting machine cycles,
whatever, to the point of imperceptable changes.

--
Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
(Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)

Hi,

I am setting up my new instillation of windows xp with numerous
partitions to sort out my files and one of these partitions is
only for temp files. I have been able to move my pagefile and all
of the temp folders onto this partition, but I cant get the
hibernation file to move. Any ideas how?

Thanks in advance,

Dan

Experimentation on my test laptop seem to show that the pagefile must indeed
reside within the same partition as the operating system. There may be ways
to SUBST or SHARE things to get to another drive letter, but it would, IMO,
go against any improvements for lack of stability.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

Pop, the pagefile does not have to be on the system partition. It can be
placed on any drive. In an XP system I would leave it right where the
installer puts it (especially with lots of ram because the pagefile will not
be used much), but some people, especially those who grew up on old and
resource starved systems, still like to move the pagefile to another drive
so that both drives can be asynchronously writing, thus speeding up
performance. This only works that way with IDE drives if they are on
different controllers (to get the asynchronous effect). With SATA drives it
works out automatically. However, what does not do any good is to put the
pagefile on a different partition of the same physical drive the system is
on. That just increases the travel distance for the read/write heads on the
one drive.

--
Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
(Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)

But, but, but ...
I thought it was agreed, the pafefile had to be in the same partition as
the os. If that's so, then why the pro/con dialog re multiple physical
drives?

At first it all made sense, then this sidetrip confused everything.

Sorry if i wasn't clear, it is two seprate hard drives

===> Umm, sorry, as you say, but it didn't necessarily "slow" the system
down; it may have NOT changed system speed overall, but it didn't HAVE to
have slowed the system down unless you are counting machine cycles,
whatever, to the point of imperceptable changes.

--
Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
(Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)
Hi,

I am setting up my new instillation of windows xp with numerous
partitions to sort out my files and one of these partitions is
only for temp files. I have been able to move my pagefile and all
of the temp folders onto this partition, but I cant get the
hibernation file to move. Any ideas how?

Thanks in advance,

Dan

Experimentation on my test laptop seem to show that the pagefile must
indeed reside within the same partition as the operating system. There
may be ways to SUBST or SHARE things to get to another drive letter, but
it would, IMO, go against any improvements for lack of stability.

 

[Rick \Nutcase\ Rogers]

The hibernate file has to be on the system partition - period. The pagefile
can be relocated. They are two different things. What Colin was referring to
is that it is usually inefficient to put the pagefile on another partition
that is on the same hard drive.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Associate Expert - WindowsXP Expert Zone

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

But, but, but ...
I thought it was agreed, the pafefile had to be in the same partition as
the os. If that's so, then why the pro/con dialog re multiple physical
drives?

At first it all made sense, then this sidetrip confused everything.

Sorry if i wasn't clear, it is two seprate hard drives

===> Umm, sorry, as you say, but it didn't necessarily "slow" the system
down; it may have NOT changed system speed overall, but it didn't HAVE to
have slowed the system down unless you are counting machine cycles,
whatever, to the point of imperceptable changes.

--
Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
(Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)
Hi,

I am setting up my new instillation of windows xp with numerous
partitions to sort out my files and one of these partitions is
only for temp files. I have been able to move my pagefile and all
of the temp folders onto this partition, but I cant get the
hibernation file to move. Any ideas how?

Thanks in advance,

Dan

Experimentation on my test laptop seem to show that the pagefile must
indeed reside within the same partition as the operating system. There
may be ways to SUBST or SHARE things to get to another drive letter, but
it would, IMO, go against any improvements for lack of stability.

 

[Stan Brown]

Pop, the pagefile does not have to be on the system partition. It can be
placed on any drive. In an XP system I would leave it right where the
installer puts it (especially with lots of ram because the pagefile will not
be used much)

I wouldn't be too sure about that last statement. I've got a GB of
RAM, and I'm running only my newsreader and browser, and the page
file is 1.3 GB.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

That does not mean the computer is going there very much. It probably
isn't. Anyway, I'm sure about what I said.

One of the reasons not to have a large page file on a system with ample ram
is that too many of the pages have staledated by the time the next hit
occurs and that just wastes time since the system is going to have to
refresh anyway. It might as well have done that in the first place.

 

[Rick \Nutcase\ Rogers]

Doesn't mean it's using it. The system default is to set the initial size at
1.5 times the amount of installed ram. That's overkill unless a full memory
dump on system failure is useful to you. Set the initial size at 100MB and
see if it ever grows.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Associate Expert - WindowsXP Expert Zone

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

 

[Stan Brown]

in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

Doesn't mean it's using it. The system default is to set the initial size at
1.5 times the amount of installed ram. That's overkill unless a full memory
dump on system failure is useful to you. Set the initial size at 100MB and
see if it ever grows.

Thanks for the suggestion. I know from Alex Nichols' article that
setting min = max = a fixed multiple of RAM size is wrong, but I
never picked up on the idea of setting the initial value low.

 

[Bob Dietz]

in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:



Thanks for the suggestion. I know from Alex Nichols' article that
setting min = max = a fixed multiple of RAM size is wrong, but I
never picked up on the idea of setting the initial value low.

If you set the intial value low, be sure to keep a close eye on the
current size of the swap file. If the size increases past 100MB, you'll
want to set a larger minimum. The goal is a non-fragmented page file.

 

[Stan Brown]

Stan Brown wrote: (1 GB RAM)

If you set the intial value low, be sure to keep a close eye on the
current size of the swap file. If the size increases past 100MB, you'll
want to set a larger minimum. The goal is a non-fragmented page file.

It seems to be staying at 102,400 KB -- exactly the 100 MB minimum
I created it as. (I gave it a max of 1512 MB.)