list of priorities on virtual memory setting

[Guest mttc]

I have two page file in seperate volume, so i want to set the

priorities. tel to xp to use first with G: and if need more space use

with D:, how to do that?

[Guest John John (MVP)]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

You can't do that. Are those pagefiles on the same hard disk? Are they

on the same controller?

 

John

 

mttc wrote:

> I have two page file in seperate volume, so i want to set the

> priorities. tel to xp to use first with G: and if need more space use

> with D:, how to do that?

[Guest mttc]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

On 17 Oct, 15:38, "John John (MVP)" <audetw...@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:

> You can't do that.  Are those pagefiles on the same hard disk?  Are they

> on the same controller?

>

> John

>

>

>

> mttc wrote:

> > I have two page file in seperate volume, so i want to set the

> > priorities. tel to xp to use first with G: and if need more space use

> > with D:, how to do that?- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

 

i ask for

A. two SATA drive attach on board

B. posibilty to redirect the first 500M (of VM) to ramdrive (I have 3G

ram).

[Guest John John (MVP)]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

mttc wrote:

> On 17 Oct, 15:38, "John John (MVP)" <audetw...@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:

>

>>You can't do that. Are those pagefiles on the same hard disk? Are they

>>on the same controller?

>>

>>John

>>

>>

>>

>>mttc wrote:

>>

>>>I have two page file in seperate volume, so i want to set the

>>>priorities. tel to xp to use first with G: and if need more space use

>>>with D:, how to do that?- Hide quoted text -

>>

>>- Show quoted text -

>

>

> i ask for

> A. two SATA drive attach on board

 

Ok. By default Windows will favour the pagefile on the least busy disk.

Not usually a good idea to place multiple pagefiles on the same hard

disk or to place it on a disk that is in a slave relationship with a

busy disk.

> B. posibilty to redirect the first 500M (of VM) to ramdrive (I have 3G

> ram).

 

No, while you can have multiple pagefiles you cannot dictate which one

Windows will use and when you consider that the purpose of the pagefile

is to provide additional memory, or to free in use memory to satisfy

other memory demands being made by processes, it defeats the purpose to

place the pagefile on a RAM drive.

 

John

[Guest John John (MVP)]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

 

 

mttc wrote:

> On 17 Oct, 15:38, "John John (MVP)" <audetw...@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:

>

>>You can't do that. Are those pagefiles on the same hard disk? Are they

>>on the same controller?

>>

>>John

>>

>>

>>

>>mttc wrote:

>>

>>>I have two page file in seperate volume, so i want to set the

>>>priorities. tel to xp to use first with G: and if need more space use

>>>with D:, how to do that?- Hide quoted text -

>>

>>- Show quoted text -

>

>

> i ask for

> A. two SATA drive attach on board

 

Ok. By default Windows will favour the pagefile on the least busy disk.

Not usually a good idea to place multiple pagefiles on the same hard

disk or to place it on a disk that is in a slave relationship with a

busy disk.

 

> B. posibilty to redirect the first 500M (of VM) to ramdrive (I have 3G

> ram).

 

No, while you can have multiple pagefiles you cannot dictate which one

Windows will use and when you consider that the purpose of the pagefile

is to provide additional memory, or to free in use memory to satisfy

other memory demands being made by processes, it defeats the purpose to

place the pagefile on a RAM drive.

 

John

[Guest John John (MVP)]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

mttc wrote:

> On 17 Oct, 15:38, "John John (MVP)" <audetw...@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:

>

>>You can't do that. Are those pagefiles on the same hard disk? Are they

>>on the same controller?

>>

>>John

>>

>>

>>

>>mttc wrote:

>>

>>>I have two page file in seperate volume, so i want to set the

>>>priorities. tel to xp to use first with G: and if need more space use

>>>with D:, how to do that?- Hide quoted text -

>>

>>- Show quoted text -

>

>

> i ask for

> A. two SATA drive attach on board

 

Ok. By default Windows will favour the pagefile on the least busy disk.

Not usually a good idea to place multiple pagefiles on the same hard

disk or to place it on a disk that is in a slave relationship with a

busy disk.

 

> B. posibilty to redirect the first 500M (of VM) to ramdrive (I have 3G

> ram).

 

No, while you can have multiple pagefiles you cannot dictate which one

Windows will use and when you consider that the purpose of the pagefile

is to provide additional memory, or to free in use memory to satisfy

other memory demands being made by processes, it defeats the purpose to

place the pagefile on a RAM drive.

 

John

[Guest mttc]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

> No, while you can have multiple pagefiles you cannot dictate which one

> Windows will use and when you consider that the purpose of the pagefile

> is to provide additional memory, or to free in use memory to satisfy

> other memory demands being made by processes, it defeats the purpose to

> place the pagefile on a RAM drive.

 

the problem is, XP put 10% of page on page files even have free

mempory, and i not sure that the hit of algorithm is best on real

word.

[Guest John John (MVP)]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

mttc wrote:

>>No, while you can have multiple pagefiles you cannot dictate which one

>>Windows will use and when you consider that the purpose of the pagefile

>>is to provide additional memory, or to free in use memory to satisfy

>>other memory demands being made by processes, it defeats the purpose to

>>place the pagefile on a RAM drive.

>

>

> the problem is, XP put 10% of page on page files even have free

> mempory, and i not sure that the hit of algorithm is best on real

> word.

 

Don't rely on what you see in the Task Manager to evaluate pagefile

usage, the figure reported there is misleading. Use Perfmon to get

accurate figures.

 

John

[Guest mttc]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

> Don't rely on what you see in the Task Manager to evaluate pagefile

> usage, the figure reported there is misleading. Use Perfmon to get

> accurate figures.

 

i look with CF Fire Monitor, and also with Perfmon, couters:

Page Fault

Transition Fault/Sec

Page/Sec

 

I see there lot of activities even I have 450M phisical free (frash xp

only with 20 tabs of IE and sql service up). It's simple for me, that

XP look ahead and try to save on the disk pages that look like not on

use. also we not have real control over what DLL cache from usese

system component. So i guess that even my pc have 4g the xp continue

read and write lot of pages.

 

I try to think about my NEW PC with 8G RAM, but with xp32 (and RAM

DRive over 4G) I not sure that I can stop the obsessive read/write

from disk. also I not sure that xp64 is good choice according the lot

of article that talking about many problems with this way.

 

what your opinion?

[Guest John John (MVP)]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

mttc wrote:

>>Don't rely on what you see in the Task Manager to evaluate pagefile

>>usage, the figure reported there is misleading. Use Perfmon to get

>>accurate figures.

>

>

> i look with CF Fire Monitor, and also with Perfmon, couters:

> Page Fault

> Transition Fault/Sec

> Page/Sec

>

> I see there lot of activities even I have 450M phisical free (frash xp

> only with 20 tabs of IE and sql service up). It's simple for me, that

> XP look ahead and try to save on the disk pages that look like not on

> use. also we not have real control over what DLL cache from usese

> system component. So i guess that even my pc have 4g the xp continue

> read and write lot of pages.

>

> I try to think about my NEW PC with 8G RAM, but with xp32 (and RAM

> DRive over 4G) I not sure that I can stop the obsessive read/write

> from disk. also I not sure that xp64 is good choice according the lot

> of article that talking about many problems with this way.

>

> what your opinion?

 

The Page Fault & Transition Fault/Sec counters don't necessarily mean

that the system is experiencing hard page faults or that it is

excessively paging in from or paging out to the pagefile. You might

want to look at the Page Reads and Page Writes counters to get a better

idea of what is going on. You might also want to look at the Paging

File object, the pagefile usage may not be as big as you think. You may

find useful information here:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/windows2000serv/reskit/iisbook/c05_memory_monitoring_specifics.mspx?mfr=true

http://blogs.technet.com/askperf/archive/2008/06/10/the-basics-of-page-faults.aspx

 

As for your "NEW PC with 8G RAM, but with xp32 (and RAM DRive over 4G)"

please note that Windows XP 32-bits cannot fully use 4GB of RAM, some of

the address space in the lower 4GB address range is reserved for use by

some of the PCI devices in your computer, the space reserved depends on

what the devices need but it could be anything between 500MB and 1GB or

more, in turn that address space is not available to the RAM so you

cannot fully use the installed RAM. As for your "RAM DRive over 4G"

please note that this is impossible on Windows XP 32-bits, XP 32-bits

cannot use more than 4GB of RAM so in fact you have no RAM drive on your

installation! The RAM drive must obtain memory allocation from the

Windows Memory Manager so the RAM drive can only obtain memory supported

by the operating system.

 

John

[Guest mttc]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

> The Page Fault & Transition Fault/Sec counters don't necessarily mean

> that the system is experiencing hard page faults or that it is

> excessively paging in from or paging out to the pagefile.  You might

> want to look at the Page Reads and Page Writes counters to get a better

> idea of what is going on.  You might also want to look at the Paging

> File object, the pagefile usage may not be as big as you think.  You may

> find useful information here:http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/windows2000serv/reskit/i...http://blogs.technet.com/askperf/archive/2008/06/10/the-basics-of-pag...

>

Also "pagefile usage" show 12% use even I have free memory. the q is

what happend if I add more 2G to my system. I think that XP continue

use with paging system, and event this is not massive use, I prefare

Control this, or move it to RamDrive.

> As for your "NEW PC with 8G RAM, but with xp32 (and RAM DRive over 4G)"

> please note that Windows XP 32-bits cannot fully use 4GB of RAM, some of

> the address space in the lower 4GB address range is reserved for use by

> some of the PCI devices in your computer, the space reserved depends on

> what the devices need but it could be anything between 500MB and 1GB or

> more, in turn that address space is not available to the RAM so you

> cannot fully use the installed RAM.  

 

So according that, how I have, if I have only 1.5G?

and by the way, wat is System Cache that use about 250M?

>As for your "RAM DRive over 4G"

> please note that this is impossible on Windows XP 32-bits, XP 32-bits

> cannot use more than 4GB of RAM so in fact you have no RAM drive on your

> installation!  The RAM drive must obtain memory allocation from the

> Windows Memory Manager so the RAM drive can only obtain memory supported

> by the operating system.

 

please see this product:

http://www.superspeed.com/desktop/ramdisk.php

[Guest John John (MVP)]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

mttc wrote:

>>The Page Fault & Transition Fault/Sec counters don't necessarily mean

>>that the system is experiencing hard page faults or that it is

>>excessively paging in from or paging out to the pagefile. You might

>>want to look at the Page Reads and Page Writes counters to get a better

>>idea of what is going on. You might also want to look at the Paging

>>File object, the pagefile usage may not be as big as you think. You may

>>find useful information here:http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/windows2000serv/reskit/i...http://blogs.technet.com/askperf/archive/2008/06/10/the-basics-of-pag...

>>

>

> Also "pagefile usage" show 12% use even I have free memory. the q is

> what happend if I add more 2G to my system. I think that XP continue

> use with paging system, and event this is not massive use, I prefare

> Control this, or move it to RamDrive.

>

>

>>As for your "NEW PC with 8G RAM, but with xp32 (and RAM DRive over 4G)"

>>please note that Windows XP 32-bits cannot fully use 4GB of RAM, some of

>>the address space in the lower 4GB address range is reserved for use by

>>some of the PCI devices in your computer, the space reserved depends on

>>what the devices need but it could be anything between 500MB and 1GB or

>>more, in turn that address space is not available to the RAM so you

>>cannot fully use the installed RAM.

>

>

> So according that, how I have, if I have only 1.5G?

 

The address space for the PCI devices is reserved at the top of the 4GB

address range so only the last 500MB to 1GB+ of RAM will be unavailable

for RAM addressing, the RAM up to the reserved area will be available so

you will start to run out of RAM addresses around the 3GB+ area. If you

have only 1.5GB of RAM it should all be available.

 

> and by the way, wat is System Cache that use about 250M?

 

File Caching

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa364218.aspx

(This is also know as the System Working Set)

 

>>As for your "RAM DRive over 4G"

>>please note that this is impossible on Windows XP 32-bits, XP 32-bits

>>cannot use more than 4GB of RAM so in fact you have no RAM drive on your

>>installation! The RAM drive must obtain memory allocation from the

>>Windows Memory Manager so the RAM drive can only obtain memory supported

>>by the operating system.

>

>

> please see this product:

> http://www.superspeed.com/desktop/ramdisk.php

 

Please see the FAQs for the product, specifically:

 

Q: Can SuperSpeed products be configured to use memory above 4 GB?

 

A: Yes, on all 64-bit and some 32-bit server platforms memory

allocations can be made from above 4 GB. On 32-bit platforms the

boot.ini /pae switch must be used...

 

 

Q: I have 4 GB of RAM installed but Windows only reports a little over

3 GB. Will SuperSpeed products use the memory above 3 GB?

 

A: The answer to this question depends on the computer's motherboard

and how it and the operating system are configured to manage memory.

SuperSpeed products utilize only those resources the operating system

recognizes and makes available...

 

http://www.superspeed.com/desktop/faq.php

 

Windows XP 32-bits cannot use memory above the 4GB range so it cannot be

made available to RAM disks.

 

John

[Guest mttc]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

thanks for all.

 

the system cache is not include cache for page?

 

So conclusion is, that no way to add on same machine Support with 32

diriver and other stuff, and give memory beyond the old boundary of

3G?

>>Q: Can SuperSpeed products be configured to use memory above 4 GB?

>>A: Yes, on all 64-bit and some 32-bit server platforms memory allocations can be made from above 4 GB. On 32-bit platforms >>the boot.ini /pae switch must be used. When memory above 4 GB is available, allocations are taken first from physical >>memory addresses above 4 GB, and then from addresses below 4 GB.

 

 

 

Or maybe if i migrate to Server2003 32 with intel PAE (I read that

this feature can make problems), it's work fine with RamDisk?

What means "and some 32-bit server platforms " ?

[Guest mttc]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

more About system-cache I also read somthing kike that:

 

 

XP System Cache Boost

The XP kernel can be loaded into your RAM with a simple registry edit.

This can greatly improve performance since the NT Kernel will always

be in your RAM. With this edit you will allocate roughly 4Mb of your

RAM for the kernel

[Guest John John (MVP)]

Re: list of priorities on virtual memory setting

 

mttc wrote:

> thanks for all.

>

> the system cache is not include cache for page?

 

If you mean for the pagefile, no.

 

> So conclusion is, that no way to add on same machine Support with 32

> diriver and other stuff, and give memory beyond the old boundary of

> 3G?

 

No, on most computers with XP 32-bits the most RAM that you can use is

somewheres around 3GB to 3.5GB, some machines with high end video cards

may only be able to use 2.5 to 2.75GB, it all depends on the devices

installed in the computer.

 

>>>Q: Can SuperSpeed products be configured to use memory above 4 GB?

>>>A: Yes, on all 64-bit and some 32-bit server platforms memory allocations

>>>can be made from above 4 GB. On 32-bit platforms the boot.ini /pae

>>>switch must be used. When memory above 4 GB is available, allocations

>>>are taken first from physical memory addresses above 4 GB, and then from

>>>addresses below 4 GB.

>

>

>

>

> Or maybe if i migrate to Server2003 32 with intel PAE (I read that

> this feature can make problems), it's work fine with RamDisk?

> What means "and some 32-bit server platforms " ?

 

It doesn't work with the Standard Server versions, you have to go to

Enterprise versions or better. In my opinion if you need a workstation

with support for more than 4GB RAM you may as well move to the 64-bit

platform. Servers using PAE are more stable in large part because of

the way in which the software and hardware is selected and in the way

that they are maintained and operated after they are setup. Once

properly setup servers do not suffer the same amount of abuse as

workstations or regular home computers, people don't usually "play" with

servers so they are less prone to certain kinds of problems. You don't

have many different persons maintaining the server and you don't install

and uninstall all kinds of things or try all kinds of software or

hardware on servers, hence they are run in a more stable manner than

workstations so they are less prone to PAE problems. See here for

memory support on different Windows versions:

 

Memory Limits for Windows Releases

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx

 

John