 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Forum / Windows XP / Performance and Maintainance / February 2008Pagefile on mounted drive has incorrect size
I'm trying to move my page file to dedicated partition. I have system partition mounted on C: and swap partition mounted on C:\Swap. C: has 200 MB free, and C:\Swap has 2 GB free. I set value of HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management\PagingFiles to C:\Swap\pagefile.sys 2048 2048. When I rebooted my computer, I have seen that size of C:\Swap\pagefile.sys is about 200 MB despite of registry settings. I think it's because system doesn't check if path to pagefile is on another partition (it looks like a bug). I dont want to give a drive letter to swap partition. Is there another way to place pagefile on the partition without drive letter? Each partition has it's own letter. The partition containing Windows (with only a few exceptions) is invariably C. If your page file is in it's own dedicated partition that partition will be some other letter other than C! What tool or utility did you use the create the partition? Whilst there are conflicting views on the merits of creating dedicated pagefile partitions all agree that such a partition should be on a second drive, preferably the first partition on that drive. They should not be on the same drive as the system partition. http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm Here is some general information concerning the differences between drives, partitions etc, which may help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_%28computing%29  SignatureHope this helps. Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > I'm trying to move my page file to dedicated partition. I have system > partition mounted on C: and swap partition mounted on C:\Swap. C: has [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > letter to swap partition. Is there another way to place pagefile on > the partition without drive letter? The idea is to move the page file to a separate partition on a second hard disk, not a separate partition on the same hard disk. The latter course of action will reduce performance. "How to configure paging files for optimization and recovery in Windows XP" http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314482 Nonetheless, you are unlikely to notice a difference in your computer's performance unless the disk to which you transfer the page file is substantially faster and substantially less accessed than the disk on which your system partition is located. And to the extent your day to day computing does not involve considerable paging, you won't notice any difference at all. --- Leonard Grey Errare humanum est > I'm trying to move my page file to dedicated partition. I have system > partition mounted on C: and swap partition mounted on C:\Swap. C: has 200 MB [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > bug). I dont want to give a drive letter to swap partition. Is there another > way to place pagefile on the partition without drive letter? Leonard Separating the pagefile from other files does slow the impact of fragmentation on the other files. You also no longer need to maintain that part of the disk occupied by the pagefile. Equally if you can place constantly changing files away from archived files you reduce the time needed to run Disk Defragmenter etc because you are working on a smaller part of the drive. These points may not have a dramatic impact but they help achieve better performance. I wrote this note as a reaction to your observation "Nonetheless, you are unlikely to notice a difference in your computer's performance" and totally agree with the earlier part of your post. SignatureRegards. Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > The idea is to move the page file to a separate partition on a second > hard disk, not a separate partition on the same hard disk. The latter [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >> letter to swap partition. Is there another way to place pagefile on >> the partition without drive letter? Hi Gerry: Always good to read your posts. Outside the lab I seriously doubt anyone would notice the delta in performance attributable to reduced fragmentation resulting from the relocation of the page file. Also: The question of whether or not a home user realizes any noticeable benefit by supposedly optimal file placement is controversial (unless you're a marketing manager for a third-party defragger - and even they don't agree of whose method of 'optimal file placement' is best.) Busy servers are a different story...I agree that they almost certainly benefit by improved disk organization. With regard to the length of time needed to defragment a volume without a page file, I believe that any benefit so gained would vanish after the first post-page file pass of the defragger. Then again, a lot depends on how you use your computer. If someone reviews software for a living or is heavily into Photoshop or video editing they could probably throw my opinions in the trash, and rightly so. --- Leonard Grey Errare humanum est > Leonard > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > are unlikely to notice a difference in your computer's performance" and > totally agree with the earlier part of your post. > Hi Gerry: > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] >> unlikely to notice a difference in your computer's performance" and >> totally agree with the earlier part of your post. Would not you two agree that, as the pagefile is hardly ever read as a sequential file, fragmentation of it is not likely to cause performance degradation. Moreover, even if it is, to the outside world, all one piece, it could still be internally fragemented. Jim You raise good points, Jim. However, I don't feel I'm sufficiently versed to provide complete answers. --- Leonard Grey Errare humanum est >> Hi Gerry: >> [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > be internally fragemented. > Jim Jim The Disk Defragmenter provided with Windows XP does not defragmenter the pagefile. Having said that I am not aware of any knowledgeable poster in these newsgroups who recommends defragmenting a pagefile. It's a waste of time. You should not, however, confuse the ramnifications of a contiguous area of disk space solely occupied by the pagefile with a non-contiguous pagefile scattered over a complete system partition. The non-contiguous pagefile fragments the available free disk space causing more rapid and greater fragmentation of new files being written to disk. SignatureHope this helps. Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Would not you two agree that, as the pagefile is hardly ever read as a > sequential file, fragmentation of it is not likely to cause > performance degradation. > Moreover, even if it is, to the outside world, all one piece, it > could still be internally fragemented. > Jim > I'm trying to move my page file to dedicated partition. Not a good idea. Doing so will *hurt* your performance, not help it. The slowest aspect of using a hard drive is the time it takes for the heads to move from one place to another. Moving the page file to a second partition on your drive puts it far from the other frequently-used data on the drive, increases the time for head movement to and from it, and slows you down. Putting it on a second *physical* drive improves performance (because that *decreases* head movement) but not to a second partition on your only drive. But wherever you put it, make sure you keep some on C:. For more info, read MVP Alex Nichol's article at http://www.aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm Also note that many people these days have enough RAM so that the page file is hardly used at all. If you fall into that category, moving it anywhere won't help. SignatureKen Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience Please Reply to the Newsgroup > I'm trying to move my page file to dedicated partition. I have system > partition mounted on C: and swap partition mounted on C:\Swap. C: has 200 [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > another > way to place pagefile on the partition without drive letter? Isn't it true that regardless of what you put in the registry, the system will only expand the pagefile when it needs to do so? Not only that, XP will never shrink the pagefile. Jim Jim Only correct if you opt for Let Windows ( the System) manage the page file and there is free space on the hard disk. Setting a maximum prevents expansion beyond the size set. SignatureHope this helps. Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Isn't it true that regardless of what you put in the registry, the > system will only expand the pagefile when it needs to do so? Not > only that, XP will never shrink the pagefile. > Jim > Jim > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> only that, XP will never shrink the pagefile. >> Jim Thanks. As I use "system managed size" in all cases, I would not know how XP handles other cases. Jim |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.