Guest db ´¯`·.. > Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low hmm? my previous posting was a draft not sure why it got posted. however, i hope this posting is better understood..... -------------------------- the vm is a machine limitation. in this case, the limitation is based on the physical memory size of your the ram chips. let's say you have a pc with 64 megabytes, of course this is only an example. the virtual memory was designed to help move data in and out of the physical ram onto the disk in a special file called pagefile.sys mathematically a 1 to 1 ratio could be used. so if you only have a 64 megabyte ram chip, then all it can mechanically move to and from the pagefile.sys is 64 megabytes of data. if one tries to set the size of a pagefile to a size 1000 megabytes, the machine will still only use 64 megabytes because of the physical ram. the above is only an example is an extreme only to help illustrate and explain. lets say that the vm has been set to a max size of 1000 megabytes but you only have a 64 megabyte ram chip, then approximately 936 megabytes of disk space that can be used for regular data is instead locked up / reserved for vm eventhough the o.s. can't use it. frankly, most regular computer users never use 50 percent of the virtual memory anyways. so in this example, most users would not use 50 megabytes of v.m. however, powerusers, and high end graphics programs run out of ram memory and virtual memory likewise, so one of the easiest options is to gain more power is to increase the machines ram. it would be wonderful that all computers could have a 64 megabyte chip and by simply maxing out the virtual memory say to 4 gigabytes would make any computer into a super computer with lots of memory - but we aint' there yet. the best way to improve performance is simply have enough ram installed. unlike my example of 64 megabytes, windows xp simply could not function with this limitation. most computers are optimized for 512 megabytes of ram. they might sell a pc with less ram, but it is done not only to reduce the cost of a pc, but is sufficient to run windows, excluding all other third party softwares. acquiring and purchasing more ram than a regular pc user needs will likely be a waste of money for the regular pc user. at the same time havng too much virtual memory will be costly to your computer and waste valuable resources. -- db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. ><)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> .. "Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message news:OgtMTWN4HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Your statement "is too large and windows simply won't use all that > additional space. In fact, it actually degrades the performance of > the operating system and wasting valuable disk space as well." set me > wondering how you might justify what you have said! > > Free disk space is valuable if you have insuffient and less or not > valuable if you have plenty! > > Why would an overlarge pagefile degrade performance? > > Your posts must have the shortest line length in these newsgroups. Is > this necessary or could you make them longer? > > -- > Regards. > > Gerry > ~~~~ > FCA > Stourport, England > Enquire, plan and execute > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> actually, if the virtual memory too >> low message implies that the space >> reserved for it is insufficient. >> >> for example let say you have >> 512 megabytes of ram. logically >> the maximum size of the vm should >> be 1.5. So the max should be set >> at 768 megabytes. >> >> however, if the max is set like 100 >> megabytes instead of 768 megabytes >> your machine will tell you that the >> vm is too low. >> >> now let's say you want to set the >> max range beyond 768 like 2500 >> megabytes. your machine will not >> cry out about vm being too low, >> however, 2500 megs is too large >> and windows simply won't use all >> that additional space. In fact, it >> actually degrades the performance >> of the operating system and wasting >> valuable disk space as well. >> >> >> in regards to the minimum size this >> is simply a low side of the range. >> >> as mentioned, go ahead and take >> the time to optimize your system. >> by trying different ranges or settings. >> >> however, i always suggest as a >> default fix for low vm is to set >> it to custom size of min=2 and >> max=1152. >> >> 1152 may be too much for >> some systems, but it works fairly >> well and can be adjusted to be >> lower or just left as is. >> >> after you find the optimum >> size for your vm. let me know >> and I can provide additional >> fyi to help you monitor your >> new settings.... >> >> but first work on the initial >> issue your o.s. is having.... >> >> >> >> db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >>> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >> >> >> . >> >> >> "Laughingstar~*" <le_sentier_battunospam368@yahoo.com> wrote in >> message news:O2sCw4G4HHA.4672@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>> db, you told me to reduce my VM, remember? >>> >>> " db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. ." >>> <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>> news:Oqu6nfC4HHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>> the initial size is the minimum windows >>>> permits. if you look at the configuration >>>> dialog for the virtual memory, it indicates >>>> the minimum allowed. but you can also >>>> input a 0 or a 1 and you will get a simple >>>> message about it. >>>> >>>> >>>> you don't have to use 2 and can test your system with >>>> higher sizes, that is if you have the time and >>>> patience. something to realize however, is that windows >>>> will not use more virtual memory than >>>> is necessary. if i'm not mistake the limit is 1.5 times >>>> the size of your physical ram. >>>> >>>> so if you max out your page file with >>>> a high amount say like 5 times the ram size, you >>>> will only be wasting that additional space that >>>> has been reserved for vm but "will not" be used by windows. >>>> >>>> although automatic resizing is a convenience >>>> for users, it is not always the best option for >>>> some systems, especially the older ones. Thus >>>> windows nags about the low virtual. >>>> >>>> my systems are optimized with custom sizes >>>> and i never get that nag. however, other systems may >>>> use the automatic resizing just fine and never get the >>>> nag as well. >>>> >>>> here is a link with more fyi on vm: >>>> >>>> http://search.microsoft.com/results.aspx?mkt=en-US&form=MSHOME&setlang=en-US&q=how+to+set+virtual+memory >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >>>>> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >>>> >>>> >>>> . >>>> >>>> >>>> "Trevor" <trevor@weather.4dinternet.co.uk> wrote in message >>>> news:eM9vtEC4HHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>>> >>>>> " db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. ." >>>>> <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:u80SUCC4HHA.5984@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/826513 >>>>>> >>>>>> you can try an custom/initial size of 2 and >>>>>> max of 1.5 times the physical size >>>>>> of your ram. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Can you explain an initial size of 2? > >
Guest John John Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low Why then are you telling users to set their pagefile to 2X RAM if the system cannot use a pagefile any larger than the amount of installed RAM? This last post of yours completely contradicts everything that you always say about the pagefile. John db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. . wrote: > the vm is a machine limitation. > > in this case, the limitation is based > on the physical memory size of your > the ram chips. > > let's say you have a pc with 64 megabytes, > of course this is only an example. > > the virtual memory was designed to help > move data in and out of the physical ram > onto the disk in a special file called pagefile.sys > > mathematically a 1 to 1 ratio could be > used. so if you only have a 64 megabyte > ram chip, then all it can mechanically move > to and from the pagefile.sys is 64 megabytes > of data. > > if one tries to set the size of a pagefile to > a size 1000 megabytes, the machine will > still only use 64 megabytes because of the > physical ram. > > the above is only an example is an > extreme only to help illustrate and explain. > > lets say that the vm has been set to a max > size of 1000 megabytes but you only have > a 64 megabyte ram chip, then approximately > 936 megabytes of disk space that can be > used for regular data is instead locked up/ > reserved for vm eventhough the o.s. can't > use it. and depending on the user, most > regular computers never use 50 percent > of the virtual memory anyways. > > powerusers, and high end graphics programs > run out of virtual memory so one of the > easiest options is to gain more power is > to increase the ram. > > it would be wonderful that all computers > could have a 64 megabyte chip and by simply > maxing out the virtual memory say to > 4 gigabytes would make any computer into > a super computer with lots of memory - but > we aint' there yet. > > the best way to improve performance is simply > have enough ram installed. too much ram > can be costly and probably a waste of money > for a regular pc user. too much virtual memory > will be costly to your computer and waste > valuable resources. > >
Guest John John Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low Same incorrect information as your other post. Readers would be well advised to completely disregard your posts on the subject. John db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. . wrote: > hmm? my previous posting was a draft > not sure why it got posted. however, i hope > this posting is better understood..... > > -------------------------- > > the vm is a machine limitation. > > in this case, the limitation is based on the physical memory size of > your > the ram chips. let's say you have a pc with 64 megabytes, of course > this is only an example. > > the virtual memory was designed to help move data in and out of the > physical ram onto the disk in a special file called pagefile.sys > > mathematically a 1 to 1 ratio could be used. so if you only have a > 64 megabyte ram chip, then all it can mechanically move to and from > the pagefile.sys is 64 megabytes of data. > > if one tries to set the size of a pagefile to a size 1000 megabytes, the > machine will still only use 64 megabytes because of the physical ram. > > the above is only an example is an extreme only to help illustrate and > explain. > > lets say that the vm has been set to a max size of 1000 megabytes > but you only have a 64 megabyte ram chip, then approximately 936 > megabytes of disk space that can be used for regular data is instead > locked up / > reserved for vm eventhough the o.s. can't use it. frankly, most regular > computer users never use 50 percent of the virtual memory anyways. so > in > this example, most users would not use 50 megabytes of v.m. > > however, powerusers, and high end graphics programs run out > of ram memory and virtual memory likewise, so one of the easiest > options is to gain more power is to increase the machines ram. > > it would be wonderful that all computers could have a 64 megabyte > chip and by simply maxing out the virtual memory say to 4 gigabytes > would make any computer into a super computer with lots of memory - but > we aint' there yet. > > the best way to improve performance is simply have enough ram installed. > unlike > my example of 64 megabytes, windows xp simply could not function with > this > limitation. most computers are optimized for 512 megabytes of ram. > they > might sell a pc with less ram, but it is done not only to reduce the > cost of a pc, > but is sufficient to run windows, excluding all other third party > softwares. > > acquiring and purchasing more ram than a regular pc user needs > will likely be a waste of money for the regular pc user. at the same > time > havng too much virtual memory will be costly to your computer and waste > valuable resources. > >
Guest Gerry Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low Sorry DB you've gone off on a tangent and ignored the questions I posted. Thanks, however, for adjusting your line length. To reduce the risk of accidentally sending Drafts uncheck Send Messages Immediately -Tools, Options, Send. Your message was innocuous but if you're fired up you can send a message saying something best left unsaid. The aspect of virtual memory you refer to as a machine limitation is not! It is a default setting, which can be changed by the user. When you refer to most users would not use 50 mb I think you will find it more than likely that most do but not all of the time. However, I am not aware of any published statistics. Usage is not a constant. All users use some pagefile memory, whether they run out of RAM memory or not. Adding RAM can reduce but not eliminate pagefile usage. Your comments about the suitability of 512 mb are a generalisation. The amount of RAM required for satisfactory performance depends on intended use. Before you reply to the questions I asked have a look at this Article: http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm -- Hope this helps. Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > hmm? my previous posting was a draft > not sure why it got posted. however, i hope > this posting is better understood..... > > -------------------------- > > the vm is a machine limitation. > > in this case, the limitation is based on the physical memory size of > your > the ram chips. let's say you have a pc with 64 megabytes, of course > this is only an example. > > the virtual memory was designed to help move data in and out of the > physical ram onto the disk in a special file called pagefile.sys > > mathematically a 1 to 1 ratio could be used. so if you only have a > 64 megabyte ram chip, then all it can mechanically move to and from > the pagefile.sys is 64 megabytes of data. > > if one tries to set the size of a pagefile to a size 1000 megabytes, > the machine will still only use 64 megabytes because of the physical > ram. > the above is only an example is an extreme only to help illustrate and > explain. > > lets say that the vm has been set to a max size of 1000 megabytes > but you only have a 64 megabyte ram chip, then approximately 936 > megabytes of disk space that can be used for regular data is instead > locked up / > reserved for vm eventhough the o.s. can't use it. frankly, most > regular computer users never use 50 percent of the virtual memory > anyways. so in > this example, most users would not use 50 megabytes of v.m. > > however, powerusers, and high end graphics programs run out > of ram memory and virtual memory likewise, so one of the easiest > options is to gain more power is to increase the machines ram. > > it would be wonderful that all computers could have a 64 megabyte > chip and by simply maxing out the virtual memory say to 4 gigabytes > would make any computer into a super computer with lots of memory - > but we aint' there yet. > > the best way to improve performance is simply have enough ram > installed. unlike > my example of 64 megabytes, windows xp simply could not function with > this > limitation. most computers are optimized for 512 megabytes of ram. > they > might sell a pc with less ram, but it is done not only to reduce the > cost of a pc, > but is sufficient to run windows, excluding all other third party > softwares. > > acquiring and purchasing more ram than a regular pc user needs > will likely be a waste of money for the regular pc user. at the same > time > havng too much virtual memory will be costly to your computer and > waste valuable resources. > > > > db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> > > > . > > > "Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:OgtMTWN4HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> Your statement "is too large and windows simply won't use all that >> additional space. In fact, it actually degrades the performance of >> the operating system and wasting valuable disk space as well." set >> me wondering how you might justify what you have said! >> >> Free disk space is valuable if you have insuffient and less or not >> valuable if you have plenty! >> >> Why would an overlarge pagefile degrade performance? >> >> Your posts must have the shortest line length in these newsgroups. Is >> this necessary or could you make them longer? >> >> -- >> Regards. >> >> Gerry >> ~~~~ >> FCA >> Stourport, England >> Enquire, plan and execute >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >>> actually, if the virtual memory too >>> low message implies that the space >>> reserved for it is insufficient. >>> >>> for example let say you have >>> 512 megabytes of ram. logically >>> the maximum size of the vm should >>> be 1.5. So the max should be set >>> at 768 megabytes. >>> >>> however, if the max is set like 100 >>> megabytes instead of 768 megabytes >>> your machine will tell you that the >>> vm is too low. >>> >>> now let's say you want to set the >>> max range beyond 768 like 2500 >>> megabytes. your machine will not >>> cry out about vm being too low, >>> however, 2500 megs is too large >>> and windows simply won't use all >>> that additional space. In fact, it >>> actually degrades the performance >>> of the operating system and wasting >>> valuable disk space as well. >>> >>> >>> in regards to the minimum size this >>> is simply a low side of the range. >>> >>> as mentioned, go ahead and take >>> the time to optimize your system. >>> by trying different ranges or settings. >>> >>> however, i always suggest as a >>> default fix for low vm is to set >>> it to custom size of min=2 and >>> max=1152. >>> >>> 1152 may be too much for >>> some systems, but it works fairly >>> well and can be adjusted to be >>> lower or just left as is. >>> >>> after you find the optimum >>> size for your vm. let me know >>> and I can provide additional >>> fyi to help you monitor your >>> new settings.... >>> >>> but first work on the initial >>> issue your o.s. is having.... >>> >>> >>> >>> db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >>>> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >>> >>> >>> . >>> >>> >>> "Laughingstar~*" <le_sentier_battunospam368@yahoo.com> wrote in >>> message news:O2sCw4G4HHA.4672@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>>> db, you told me to reduce my VM, remember? >>>> >>>> " db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. ." >>>> <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>> news:Oqu6nfC4HHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>> the initial size is the minimum windows >>>>> permits. if you look at the configuration >>>>> dialog for the virtual memory, it indicates >>>>> the minimum allowed. but you can also >>>>> input a 0 or a 1 and you will get a simple >>>>> message about it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> you don't have to use 2 and can test your system with >>>>> higher sizes, that is if you have the time and >>>>> patience. something to realize however, is that windows >>>>> will not use more virtual memory than >>>>> is necessary. if i'm not mistake the limit is 1.5 times >>>>> the size of your physical ram. >>>>> >>>>> so if you max out your page file with >>>>> a high amount say like 5 times the ram size, you >>>>> will only be wasting that additional space that >>>>> has been reserved for vm but "will not" be used by windows. >>>>> >>>>> although automatic resizing is a convenience >>>>> for users, it is not always the best option for >>>>> some systems, especially the older ones. Thus >>>>> windows nags about the low virtual. >>>>> >>>>> my systems are optimized with custom sizes >>>>> and i never get that nag. however, other systems may >>>>> use the automatic resizing just fine and never get the >>>>> nag as well. >>>>> >>>>> here is a link with more fyi on vm: >>>>> >>>>> http://search.microsoft.com/results.aspx?mkt=en-US&form=MSHOME&setlang=en-US&q=how+to+set+virtual+memory >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >>>>>> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Trevor" <trevor@weather.4dinternet.co.uk> wrote in message >>>>> news:eM9vtEC4HHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>>>> >>>>>> " db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. ." >>>>>> <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:u80SUCC4HHA.5984@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/826513 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> you can try an custom/initial size of 2 and >>>>>>> max of 1.5 times the physical size >>>>>>> of your ram. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Can you explain an initial size of 2?
Guest db ´¯`·.. > Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low i think on one occasion i suggested to set the vm at 2.5 the size of ram, but should have been 1.5 however, in either case, these measurements are simply a "marginal floor" and can be reduced to 1.0 or even to .75 of the ram size. it all depends on the experience of the user to measure and make the decision of what size is optimal for their unique setup. as mentioned, regular pc users may not even use 50 percent of the virtual memory. so anyone could set their vm size to .5 or 50% of the ram size if they wanted to. and if it is too small then windows will simply say so. however, if someone wants to set their vm to 4 gigabytes, then they are free to do so as well. but again windows will let the user know in one way or another that the oversized vm will reduce the performance of the system. if optimizing the vm is too complex than set it to system managed / automatic mode and don't worry about it. however, this mode doesn't work for all pc's and it will produce a "vm too low" message. what should occur when the vm is set to system managed mode is automatically increase the vm size if it is too low. however, some pc's cannot do this successfully for a number of reasons. unfortunately, there is no one size fits all for vm. some users may not use all of it, while others will run out. my postings and my perspective is one aspect for setting the vm at a fixed size and having control over it. it's not really a big deal to use the custom option and adjust the size of vm manually. by manually controlling your the size of the vm you can increase the size if you get a message that it is too low or the pc seems to be sluggish or decrease the size if the higher setting seems to make your pc sluggish as well. the margin that best determines if the vm is too low or too high is at the "exact" size of the physical ram. So if the vm size is set a little higher or is set a little lower than the exact size of your ram, it is not a big deal. sorry if it sounds confusing, but it can be because it is a balancing act to optimize a pc for peak performance. however, in the dialog window where the vm can be modified / adjusted the system clearly provides the min and the recommended max on the lower half of the dialog. -- db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. ><)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> .. "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message news:u$xGbWO4HHA.600@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Why then are you telling users to set their pagefile to 2X RAM if the > system cannot use a pagefile any larger than the amount of installed > RAM? This last post of yours completely contradicts everything that > you always say about the pagefile. > > John > > db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. . wrote: > >> the vm is a machine limitation. >> >> in this case, the limitation is based >> on the physical memory size of your >> the ram chips. >> >> let's say you have a pc with 64 megabytes, >> of course this is only an example. >> >> the virtual memory was designed to help >> move data in and out of the physical ram >> onto the disk in a special file called pagefile.sys >> >> mathematically a 1 to 1 ratio could be >> used. so if you only have a 64 megabyte >> ram chip, then all it can mechanically move >> to and from the pagefile.sys is 64 megabytes >> of data. >> >> if one tries to set the size of a pagefile to >> a size 1000 megabytes, the machine will >> still only use 64 megabytes because of the >> physical ram. >> >> the above is only an example is an >> extreme only to help illustrate and explain. >> >> lets say that the vm has been set to a max >> size of 1000 megabytes but you only have >> a 64 megabyte ram chip, then approximately >> 936 megabytes of disk space that can be >> used for regular data is instead locked up/ >> reserved for vm eventhough the o.s. can't >> use it. and depending on the user, most >> regular computers never use 50 percent >> of the virtual memory anyways. >> >> powerusers, and high end graphics programs >> run out of virtual memory so one of the >> easiest options is to gain more power is >> to increase the ram. >> >> it would be wonderful that all computers >> could have a 64 megabyte chip and by simply >> maxing out the virtual memory say to >> 4 gigabytes would make any computer into >> a super computer with lots of memory - but >> we aint' there yet. >> >> the best way to improve performance is simply >> have enough ram installed. too much ram >> can be costly and probably a waste of money >> for a regular pc user. too much virtual memory >> will be costly to your computer and waste >> valuable resources. >>
Guest db ´¯`·.. > Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low "This is John.... I order everyone to disregard the postings and suggestions of others. WHY? because i say so, no further explanation is necessary....." the problem here is that mandating to disregard information is notwithstanding if you cannot provide something better or provide the courtesy of your own explanations. ---------------------------------------------------- however, i did take the time to reaffirm my position and make it a bit more clearer against your sub thread. ideally, i will refrain from responding to anyone else other than the o.p. if anyone else has a question, then they are free (literally free) to create a thread of their own and receive answers from everyone including yours that will help with their issue. -- db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. ><)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> .. "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message news:evOcMZO4HHA.5316@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Same incorrect information as your other post. Readers would be well > advised to completely disregard your posts on the subject. > > John > > db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. . wrote: > >> hmm? my previous posting was a draft >> not sure why it got posted. however, i hope >> this posting is better understood..... >> >> -------------------------- >> >> the vm is a machine limitation. >> >> in this case, the limitation is based on the physical memory size of >> your >> the ram chips. let's say you have a pc with 64 megabytes, of course >> this is only an example. >> >> the virtual memory was designed to help move data in and out of the >> physical ram onto the disk in a special file called pagefile.sys >> >> mathematically a 1 to 1 ratio could be used. so if you only have a >> 64 megabyte ram chip, then all it can mechanically move to and from >> the pagefile.sys is 64 megabytes of data. >> >> if one tries to set the size of a pagefile to a size 1000 megabytes, >> the >> machine will still only use 64 megabytes because of the physical >> ram. >> >> the above is only an example is an extreme only to help illustrate >> and >> explain. >> >> lets say that the vm has been set to a max size of 1000 megabytes >> but you only have a 64 megabyte ram chip, then approximately 936 >> megabytes of disk space that can be used for regular data is instead >> locked up / >> reserved for vm eventhough the o.s. can't use it. frankly, most >> regular >> computer users never use 50 percent of the virtual memory anyways. >> so >> in >> this example, most users would not use 50 megabytes of v.m. >> >> however, powerusers, and high end graphics programs run out >> of ram memory and virtual memory likewise, so one of the easiest >> options is to gain more power is to increase the machines ram. >> >> it would be wonderful that all computers could have a 64 megabyte >> chip and by simply maxing out the virtual memory say to 4 gigabytes >> would make any computer into a super computer with lots of memory - >> but >> we aint' there yet. >> >> the best way to improve performance is simply have enough ram >> installed. >> unlike >> my example of 64 megabytes, windows xp simply could not function with >> this >> limitation. most computers are optimized for 512 megabytes of ram. >> they >> might sell a pc with less ram, but it is done not only to reduce the >> cost of a pc, >> but is sufficient to run windows, excluding all other third party >> softwares. >> >> acquiring and purchasing more ram than a regular pc user needs >> will likely be a waste of money for the regular pc user. at the same >> time >> havng too much virtual memory will be costly to your computer and >> waste >> valuable resources. >>
Guest db ´¯`·.. > Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low actually, although it seems you are providing a courtesy, it was simply an attempt to create controversy. as far as I am concerned you can set the vm to any size that you think is best for your system. you seem somewhat reasonable therefore you would also have reasoned that if I wanted your opinion i would have asked for it. I stand by my suggestion because it will help the o.p., whether or not you like it. If you have strong reservations about setting the vm at a fixed size, then please forward them to the microsoft software engineers so that they can remove the feature / option. until then, i will continue to take advantage of the option windows has provided and provide it to computer users who are encountering difficulties with their vm, similar to what is described by "MICROSOFT": http://support.microsoft.com/kb/308417 sorry to trump you... -- db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. ><)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> .. "Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message news:uWcbOwO4HHA.1484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Sorry DB you've gone off on a tangent and ignored the questions I > posted. > > Thanks, however, for adjusting your line length. > > To reduce the risk of accidentally sending Drafts uncheck Send > Messages Immediately -Tools, Options, Send. Your message was innocuous > but if you're fired up you can send a message saying something best > left unsaid. > > The aspect of virtual memory you refer to as a machine limitation is > not! It is a default setting, which can be changed by the user. > > When you refer to most users would not use 50 mb I think you will find > it more than likely that most do but not all of the time. However, I > am not aware of any published statistics. Usage is not a constant. > > All users use some pagefile memory, whether they run out of RAM memory > or not. Adding RAM can reduce but not eliminate pagefile usage. > > Your comments about the suitability of 512 mb are a generalisation. > The amount of RAM required for satisfactory performance depends on > intended use. > > Before you reply to the questions I asked have a look at this Article: > http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm > > > -- > > > > Hope this helps. > > Gerry > ~~~~ > FCA > Stourport, England > Enquire, plan and execute > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> hmm? my previous posting was a draft >> not sure why it got posted. however, i hope >> this posting is better understood..... >> >> -------------------------- >> >> the vm is a machine limitation. >> >> in this case, the limitation is based on the physical memory size of >> your >> the ram chips. let's say you have a pc with 64 megabytes, of course >> this is only an example. >> >> the virtual memory was designed to help move data in and out of the >> physical ram onto the disk in a special file called pagefile.sys >> >> mathematically a 1 to 1 ratio could be used. so if you only have a >> 64 megabyte ram chip, then all it can mechanically move to and from >> the pagefile.sys is 64 megabytes of data. >> >> if one tries to set the size of a pagefile to a size 1000 megabytes, >> the machine will still only use 64 megabytes because of the physical >> ram. >> the above is only an example is an extreme only to help illustrate >> and >> explain. >> >> lets say that the vm has been set to a max size of 1000 megabytes >> but you only have a 64 megabyte ram chip, then approximately 936 >> megabytes of disk space that can be used for regular data is instead >> locked up / >> reserved for vm eventhough the o.s. can't use it. frankly, most >> regular computer users never use 50 percent of the virtual memory >> anyways. so in >> this example, most users would not use 50 megabytes of v.m. >> >> however, powerusers, and high end graphics programs run out >> of ram memory and virtual memory likewise, so one of the easiest >> options is to gain more power is to increase the machines ram. >> >> it would be wonderful that all computers could have a 64 megabyte >> chip and by simply maxing out the virtual memory say to 4 gigabytes >> would make any computer into a super computer with lots of memory - >> but we aint' there yet. >> >> the best way to improve performance is simply have enough ram >> installed. unlike >> my example of 64 megabytes, windows xp simply could not function with >> this >> limitation. most computers are optimized for 512 megabytes of ram. >> they >> might sell a pc with less ram, but it is done not only to reduce the >> cost of a pc, >> but is sufficient to run windows, excluding all other third party >> softwares. >> >> acquiring and purchasing more ram than a regular pc user needs >> will likely be a waste of money for the regular pc user. at the same >> time >> havng too much virtual memory will be costly to your computer and >> waste valuable resources. >> >> >> >> db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >>> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >> >> >> . >> >> >> "Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:OgtMTWN4HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>> Your statement "is too large and windows simply won't use all that >>> additional space. In fact, it actually degrades the performance >>> of >>> the operating system and wasting valuable disk space as well." set >>> me wondering how you might justify what you have said! >>> >>> Free disk space is valuable if you have insuffient and less or not >>> valuable if you have plenty! >>> >>> Why would an overlarge pagefile degrade performance? >>> >>> Your posts must have the shortest line length in these newsgroups. >>> Is >>> this necessary or could you make them longer? >>> >>> -- >>> Regards. >>> >>> Gerry >>> ~~~~ >>> FCA >>> Stourport, England >>> Enquire, plan and execute >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> >>>> actually, if the virtual memory too >>>> low message implies that the space >>>> reserved for it is insufficient. >>>> >>>> for example let say you have >>>> 512 megabytes of ram. logically >>>> the maximum size of the vm should >>>> be 1.5. So the max should be set >>>> at 768 megabytes. >>>> >>>> however, if the max is set like 100 >>>> megabytes instead of 768 megabytes >>>> your machine will tell you that the >>>> vm is too low. >>>> >>>> now let's say you want to set the >>>> max range beyond 768 like 2500 >>>> megabytes. your machine will not >>>> cry out about vm being too low, >>>> however, 2500 megs is too large >>>> and windows simply won't use all >>>> that additional space. In fact, it >>>> actually degrades the performance >>>> of the operating system and wasting >>>> valuable disk space as well. >>>> >>>> >>>> in regards to the minimum size this >>>> is simply a low side of the range. >>>> >>>> as mentioned, go ahead and take >>>> the time to optimize your system. >>>> by trying different ranges or settings. >>>> >>>> however, i always suggest as a >>>> default fix for low vm is to set >>>> it to custom size of min=2 and >>>> max=1152. >>>> >>>> 1152 may be too much for >>>> some systems, but it works fairly >>>> well and can be adjusted to be >>>> lower or just left as is. >>>> >>>> after you find the optimum >>>> size for your vm. let me know >>>> and I can provide additional >>>> fyi to help you monitor your >>>> new settings.... >>>> >>>> but first work on the initial >>>> issue your o.s. is having.... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >>>>> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >>>> >>>> >>>> . >>>> >>>> >>>> "Laughingstar~*" <le_sentier_battunospam368@yahoo.com> wrote in >>>> message news:O2sCw4G4HHA.4672@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>>>> db, you told me to reduce my VM, remember? >>>>> >>>>> " db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. ." >>>>> <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:Oqu6nfC4HHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>> the initial size is the minimum windows >>>>>> permits. if you look at the configuration >>>>>> dialog for the virtual memory, it indicates >>>>>> the minimum allowed. but you can also >>>>>> input a 0 or a 1 and you will get a simple >>>>>> message about it. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> you don't have to use 2 and can test your system with >>>>>> higher sizes, that is if you have the time and >>>>>> patience. something to realize however, is that windows >>>>>> will not use more virtual memory than >>>>>> is necessary. if i'm not mistake the limit is 1.5 times >>>>>> the size of your physical ram. >>>>>> >>>>>> so if you max out your page file with >>>>>> a high amount say like 5 times the ram size, you >>>>>> will only be wasting that additional space that >>>>>> has been reserved for vm but "will not" be used by windows. >>>>>> >>>>>> although automatic resizing is a convenience >>>>>> for users, it is not always the best option for >>>>>> some systems, especially the older ones. Thus >>>>>> windows nags about the low virtual. >>>>>> >>>>>> my systems are optimized with custom sizes >>>>>> and i never get that nag. however, other systems may >>>>>> use the automatic resizing just fine and never get the >>>>>> nag as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> here is a link with more fyi on vm: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://search.microsoft.com/results.aspx?mkt=en-US&form=MSHOME&setlang=en-US&q=how+to+set+virtual+memory >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >>>>>>> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. >>>>>>> ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "Trevor" <trevor@weather.4dinternet.co.uk> wrote in message >>>>>> news:eM9vtEC4HHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> " db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. ." >>>>>>> <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:u80SUCC4HHA.5984@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/826513 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> you can try an custom/initial size of 2 and >>>>>>>> max of 1.5 times the physical size >>>>>>>> of your ram. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Can you explain an initial size of 2? > >
Guest Gerry Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low What trump would that be? You've gone off on a tangent again. I repeat my questions! Your statement "is too large and windows simply won't use all that additional space. In fact, it actually degrades the performance of the operating system and wasting valuable disk space as well." set me wondering how you might justify what you have said! Free disk space is valuable if you have insuffient and less or not valuable if you have plenty! Explain how free disk space has to be valuable? Why would an overlarge pagefile degrade performance? -- Hope this helps. Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > actually, although it seems you > are providing a courtesy, it was simply > an attempt to create controversy. > > as far as I am concerned you can set the > vm to any size that you think is best for your system. > > you seem somewhat reasonable therefore you would also have > reasoned that if I wanted your opinion i would have > asked for it. > > I stand by my suggestion because it will help the > o.p., whether or not you like it. If you have strong > reservations about setting the vm at a fixed size, then > please forward them to the microsoft software engineers > so that they can remove the feature / option. > > until then, i will continue to take advantage of > the option windows has provided and provide > it to computer users who are encountering > difficulties with their vm, similar to what > is described by "MICROSOFT": > > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/308417 > > sorry to trump you... > > > db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> > > > . > > > "Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:uWcbOwO4HHA.1484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> Sorry DB you've gone off on a tangent and ignored the questions I >> posted. >> >> Thanks, however, for adjusting your line length. >> >> To reduce the risk of accidentally sending Drafts uncheck Send >> Messages Immediately -Tools, Options, Send. Your message was >> innocuous but if you're fired up you can send a message saying >> something best left unsaid. >> >> The aspect of virtual memory you refer to as a machine limitation is >> not! It is a default setting, which can be changed by the user. >> >> When you refer to most users would not use 50 mb I think you will >> find it more than likely that most do but not all of the time. >> However, I am not aware of any published statistics. Usage is not a >> constant. All users use some pagefile memory, whether they run out of >> RAM >> memory or not. Adding RAM can reduce but not eliminate pagefile >> usage. Your comments about the suitability of 512 mb are a >> generalisation. >> The amount of RAM required for satisfactory performance depends on >> intended use. >> >> Before you reply to the questions I asked have a look at this >> Article: http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> Hope this helps. >> >> Gerry >> ~~~~ >> FCA >> Stourport, England >> Enquire, plan and execute >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >>> hmm? my previous posting was a draft >>> not sure why it got posted. however, i hope >>> this posting is better understood..... >>> >>> -------------------------- >>> >>> the vm is a machine limitation. >>> >>> in this case, the limitation is based on the physical memory size of >>> your >>> the ram chips. let's say you have a pc with 64 megabytes, of course >>> this is only an example. >>> >>> the virtual memory was designed to help move data in and out of the >>> physical ram onto the disk in a special file called pagefile.sys >>> >>> mathematically a 1 to 1 ratio could be used. so if you only have a >>> 64 megabyte ram chip, then all it can mechanically move to and from >>> the pagefile.sys is 64 megabytes of data. >>> >>> if one tries to set the size of a pagefile to a size 1000 megabytes, >>> the machine will still only use 64 megabytes because of the physical >>> ram. >>> the above is only an example is an extreme only to help illustrate >>> and >>> explain. >>> >>> lets say that the vm has been set to a max size of 1000 megabytes >>> but you only have a 64 megabyte ram chip, then approximately 936 >>> megabytes of disk space that can be used for regular data is instead >>> locked up / >>> reserved for vm eventhough the o.s. can't use it. frankly, most >>> regular computer users never use 50 percent of the virtual memory >>> anyways. so in >>> this example, most users would not use 50 megabytes of v.m. >>> >>> however, powerusers, and high end graphics programs run out >>> of ram memory and virtual memory likewise, so one of the easiest >>> options is to gain more power is to increase the machines ram. >>> >>> it would be wonderful that all computers could have a 64 megabyte >>> chip and by simply maxing out the virtual memory say to 4 gigabytes >>> would make any computer into a super computer with lots of memory - >>> but we aint' there yet. >>> >>> the best way to improve performance is simply have enough ram >>> installed. unlike >>> my example of 64 megabytes, windows xp simply could not function >>> with this >>> limitation. most computers are optimized for 512 megabytes of ram. >>> they >>> might sell a pc with less ram, but it is done not only to reduce the >>> cost of a pc, >>> but is sufficient to run windows, excluding all other third party >>> softwares. >>> >>> acquiring and purchasing more ram than a regular pc user needs >>> will likely be a waste of money for the regular pc user. at the >>> same time >>> havng too much virtual memory will be costly to your computer and >>> waste valuable resources. >>> >>> >>> >>> db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >>>> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >>> >>> >>> . >>> >>> >>> "Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message >>> news:OgtMTWN4HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>>> Your statement "is too large and windows simply won't use all that >>>> additional space. In fact, it actually degrades the >>>> performance of >>>> the operating system and wasting valuable disk space as well." set >>>> me wondering how you might justify what you have said! >>>> >>>> Free disk space is valuable if you have insuffient and less or not >>>> valuable if you have plenty! >>>> >>>> Why would an overlarge pagefile degrade performance? >>>> >>>> Your posts must have the shortest line length in these newsgroups. >>>> Is >>>> this necessary or could you make them longer? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Regards. >>>> >>>> Gerry >>>> ~~~~ >>>> FCA >>>> Stourport, England >>>> Enquire, plan and execute >>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>>> >>>>> actually, if the virtual memory too >>>>> low message implies that the space >>>>> reserved for it is insufficient. >>>>> >>>>> for example let say you have >>>>> 512 megabytes of ram. logically >>>>> the maximum size of the vm should >>>>> be 1.5. So the max should be set >>>>> at 768 megabytes. >>>>> >>>>> however, if the max is set like 100 >>>>> megabytes instead of 768 megabytes >>>>> your machine will tell you that the >>>>> vm is too low. >>>>> >>>>> now let's say you want to set the >>>>> max range beyond 768 like 2500 >>>>> megabytes. your machine will not >>>>> cry out about vm being too low, >>>>> however, 2500 megs is too large >>>>> and windows simply won't use all >>>>> that additional space. In fact, it >>>>> actually degrades the performance >>>>> of the operating system and wasting >>>>> valuable disk space as well. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> in regards to the minimum size this >>>>> is simply a low side of the range. >>>>> >>>>> as mentioned, go ahead and take >>>>> the time to optimize your system. >>>>> by trying different ranges or settings. >>>>> >>>>> however, i always suggest as a >>>>> default fix for low vm is to set >>>>> it to custom size of min=2 and >>>>> max=1152. >>>>> >>>>> 1152 may be too much for >>>>> some systems, but it works fairly >>>>> well and can be adjusted to be >>>>> lower or just left as is. >>>>> >>>>> after you find the optimum >>>>> size for your vm. let me know >>>>> and I can provide additional >>>>> fyi to help you monitor your >>>>> new settings.... >>>>> >>>>> but first work on the initial >>>>> issue your o.s. is having.... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >>>>>> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Laughingstar~*" <le_sentier_battunospam368@yahoo.com> wrote in >>>>> message news:O2sCw4G4HHA.4672@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>>>>> db, you told me to reduce my VM, remember? >>>>>> >>>>>> " db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. ." >>>>>> <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:Oqu6nfC4HHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>>> the initial size is the minimum windows >>>>>>> permits. if you look at the configuration >>>>>>> dialog for the virtual memory, it indicates >>>>>>> the minimum allowed. but you can also >>>>>>> input a 0 or a 1 and you will get a simple >>>>>>> message about it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> you don't have to use 2 and can test your system with >>>>>>> higher sizes, that is if you have the time and >>>>>>> patience. something to realize however, is that windows >>>>>>> will not use more virtual memory than >>>>>>> is necessary. if i'm not mistake the limit is 1.5 times >>>>>>> the size of your physical ram. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> so if you max out your page file with >>>>>>> a high amount say like 5 times the ram size, you >>>>>>> will only be wasting that additional space that >>>>>>> has been reserved for vm but "will not" be used by windows. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> although automatic resizing is a convenience >>>>>>> for users, it is not always the best option for >>>>>>> some systems, especially the older ones. Thus >>>>>>> windows nags about the low virtual. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> my systems are optimized with custom sizes >>>>>>> and i never get that nag. however, other systems may >>>>>>> use the automatic resizing just fine and never get the >>>>>>> nag as well. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> here is a link with more fyi on vm: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://search.microsoft.com/results.aspx?mkt=en-US&form=MSHOME&setlang=en-US&q=how+to+set+virtual+memory >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >>>>>>>> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. >>>>>>>> ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Trevor" <trevor@weather.4dinternet.co.uk> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:eM9vtEC4HHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> " db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. ." >>>>>>>> <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:u80SUCC4HHA.5984@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/826513 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> you can try an custom/initial size of 2 and >>>>>>>>> max of 1.5 times the physical size >>>>>>>>> of your ram. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Can you explain an initial size of 2?
Guest John John Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low The only further explanation necessary is that the "information" that you present is completely inaccurate! One minute you tell users to set their pagefile at 1.5 to 2x RAM then you tell us that Windows cannot use a pagefile that is larger than the amount installed RAM, which begs the question, "If Windows cannot use a pagefile larger than the installed RAM why on earth are you telling users to set their pagefile to 2x RAM?" Windows can use Multiple pagefiles on multiple spindles and it can use a single or combined amounts of paging files that is many times the amount of installed RAM. Whether or not users need that much paging capacity is another matter altogether, the point here is that the information you provide in these posts is *completely* inaccurate and readers looking for reliable information should disregard the uninformed notions that you posted! John db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. . wrote: > "This is John.... I order everyone to disregard > the postings and suggestions of others. WHY? > because i say so, no further explanation is > necessary....." > > the problem here is that mandating > to disregard information is notwithstanding > if you cannot provide something better or > provide the courtesy of your own explanations. > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > however, i did take the time to reaffirm my > position and make it a bit more clearer against > your sub thread. ideally, i will refrain from > responding to anyone else other than the o.p. > > if anyone else has a question, then they are > free (literally free) to create a thread of their own > and receive answers from everyone including yours > that will help with their issue. >
Guest db ´¯`·.. > Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low for one thing, the larger the pagefile is the greater the fragmentation is - This is a direct correlation. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314482/ : "An unfragmented paging file leads to faster virtual memory access and to a greater chance of a dump-file capture that is free of significant errors. " While there are some systems whose performance is negligible in spite of a fragmented disk, there are still many pc's that have an inverse affect between performance and fragmentation. As I eluded to, power users know what to expect from their own machines and know how to maximize their available resources. However my suggestion is made to fix a fundamental problem with a fundamental with low virtual memory messages and presumably being produced on a regular pc of regular pc users. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/308417 : For best performance, do not set the initial size to less than the minimum recommended size under Total paging file size for all drives. The recommended size is equivalent to 1.5 times the RAM on your computer. It is good practice to leave the paging file at its recommended size. However, you may increase its size if you frequently use programs that use much memory. Unfortunately my friend I need to move on, I do appreciate that you did not result to using demeaning language. Possibly that is why I took the time to provide the above. It seems that the information above may not apply to your system or to others who have higher expectations from their systems. Unfortunately, not everyone else may be as fortunate. Funny, I frown upon people who make little issues like this into a major project and thesis...... I will have to develop a method to express and dismiss them in a polite manner next time.... <g>
Guest Gerry Posted August 18, 2007 Posted August 18, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low Your argument falls down if the pagefile is contiguous. See the Article you quote. This is easily achieved when the pagefile is in it's own partition on a second drive. It is less easy to achieve if you have a single drive and free disk space is less than say 60%. However, in some situations where you cannot add RAM memory you have to increase the pagefile size or give up on trying to use the computer for a purpose where large amounts of memory are required. Adding a second hardrive, especially if you have an old one which remains in a usable condition is the most economic way to proceed. -- Hope this helps. Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > for one thing, > > the larger the pagefile is the > greater the fragmentation is - > This is a direct correlation. > > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314482/ : "An unfragmented paging > file leads to faster virtual memory access and to a greater chance of > a dump-file capture that is free of significant errors. " > > > While there are some systems whose performance > is negligible in spite of a fragmented disk, there are > still many pc's that have an inverse affect > between performance and fragmentation. > > As I eluded to, power users know what > to expect from their own machines and know > how to maximize their available resources. > > However my suggestion is made > to fix a fundamental problem with a > fundamental with low virtual memory messages > and presumably being produced > on a regular pc of regular pc users. > > > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/308417 : For best performance, do not > set the initial size to less than the minimum recommended size under > Total paging file size for all drives. The recommended size is > equivalent to 1.5 times the RAM on your computer. It is good practice > to leave the paging file at its recommended size. However, you may > increase its size if you frequently use programs that use much memory. > > Unfortunately my friend I need to move on, > I do appreciate that you did not result to > using demeaning language. Possibly that is > why I took the time to provide the above. > > It seems that the information > above may not apply to your system > or to others who have higher expectations > from their systems. > > Unfortunately, not everyone else may > be as fortunate. > > Funny, I frown upon people who make > little issues like this into a major project > and thesis...... > > I will have to develop a method to express > and dismiss them in a polite manner next time.... > > <g>
Guest db ´¯`·.. > Posted August 18, 2007 Posted August 18, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low my intent is to help the o.p. who has a fundamental issue with a fundamental resolution primarily from the absolute source - Microsoft. as far as i am concerned i had long completed my intent. however, i mistakenly fell into the little trap you guys enjoy playing. unfortunately, you nor the other respondent provided any assistance or made any suggestions pursuant to assisting the o.p. however, you were successful at hijacking the thread for your own benefit and for argument sake it is unfortunate, but if there are any shortfalls to be considered they are not mine and if there were any tangents taken, they were not mine as well. the bottom line: it is the o.p.'s criticism that counts. unless you have a problem and start a new thread seeking answers, your criticisms of others has no value. there will be no more pitiful arguments from you, i trust. -- db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. ><)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> .. "Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message news:uOlSOqW4HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Your argument falls down if the pagefile is contiguous. See the > Article you quote. This is easily achieved when the pagefile is in > it's own partition on a second drive. It is less easy to achieve if > you have a single drive and free disk space is less than say 60%. > > However, in some situations where you cannot add RAM memory you have > to increase the pagefile size or give up on trying to use the computer > for a purpose where large amounts of memory are required. Adding a > second hardrive, especially if you have an old one which remains in a > usable condition is the most economic way to proceed. > > -- > > > > Hope this helps. > > Gerry > ~~~~ > FCA > Stourport, England > Enquire, plan and execute > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > >> for one thing, >> >> the larger the pagefile is the >> greater the fragmentation is - >> This is a direct correlation. >> >> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314482/ : "An unfragmented paging >> file leads to faster virtual memory access and to a greater chance of >> a dump-file capture that is free of significant errors. " >> >> >> While there are some systems whose performance >> is negligible in spite of a fragmented disk, there are >> still many pc's that have an inverse affect >> between performance and fragmentation. >> >> As I eluded to, power users know what >> to expect from their own machines and know >> how to maximize their available resources. >> >> However my suggestion is made >> to fix a fundamental problem with a >> fundamental with low virtual memory messages >> and presumably being produced >> on a regular pc of regular pc users. >> >> >> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/308417 : For best performance, do not >> set the initial size to less than the minimum recommended size under >> Total paging file size for all drives. The recommended size is >> equivalent to 1.5 times the RAM on your computer. It is good practice >> to leave the paging file at its recommended size. However, you may >> increase its size if you frequently use programs that use much >> memory. >> >> Unfortunately my friend I need to move on, >> I do appreciate that you did not result to >> using demeaning language. Possibly that is >> why I took the time to provide the above. >> >> It seems that the information >> above may not apply to your system >> or to others who have higher expectations >> from their systems. >> >> Unfortunately, not everyone else may >> be as fortunate. >> >> Funny, I frown upon people who make >> little issues like this into a major project >> and thesis...... >> >> I will have to develop a method to express >> and dismiss them in a polite manner next time.... >> >> <g> > >
Guest jorgen Posted August 18, 2007 Posted August 18, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. . wrote: > however, i mistakenly > fell into the little trap you guys > enjoy playing. I wouldn't call it a trap. A couple of guys pointed out that you've misunderstood how the system works. It's better to have that cleared up instead of going down a wrong road
Guest db ´¯`·.. > Posted August 18, 2007 Posted August 18, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low >"jorgen" <na@invalid> wrote in message >news:%?>23fWQkOa4HHA.5740@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > I wouldn't call it a trap. A couple of guys pointed out that you've > misunderstood how the system works. It's better to have that cleared > up instead of going down a wrong road the misunderstandings are yours to have taken this road and trolling onto this subthread to show us how wise your are. however, it is unfortunate for you that you also showed us that you were not wise enough to refrain from the mal intent and instead provide a professional response to the original question at hand. Something for you to keep in mind: "DO NOT ALTER MY POSTINGS OR ANYONE ELSE'S FOR YOUR SARCASM" you should have no misunderstanding now.
Guest Gerry Posted August 18, 2007 Posted August 18, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low No one is setting traps. All I have been trying to correct is the misinformation you have been putting out. You only made one post to the OP Trevor on the subject of virtual memory! -- Hope this helps. Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > my intent is to help > the o.p. who has a fundamental > issue with a fundamental > resolution primarily from > the absolute source - Microsoft. > > as far as i am concerned > i had long completed my > intent. however, i mistakenly > fell into the little trap you guys > enjoy playing. > > unfortunately, you nor the other > respondent provided any assistance > or made any suggestions pursuant > to assisting the o.p. > > however, you were successful > at hijacking the thread for your > own benefit and for argument sake > > it is unfortunate, but if there > are any shortfalls to be considered > they are not mine and if there were > any tangents taken, they were not > mine as well. > > the bottom line: > > it is the o.p.'s criticism that counts. > > unless you have a problem and > start a new thread seeking answers, > your criticisms of others has no value. > > there will be no more pitiful > arguments from you, i trust. > > > db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸. >> <)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º> > > > . > > > "Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:uOlSOqW4HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Your argument falls down if the pagefile is contiguous. See the >> Article you quote. This is easily achieved when the pagefile is in >> it's own partition on a second drive. It is less easy to achieve if >> you have a single drive and free disk space is less than say 60%. >> >> However, in some situations where you cannot add RAM memory you have >> to increase the pagefile size or give up on trying to use the >> computer for a purpose where large amounts of memory are required. >> Adding a second hardrive, especially if you have an old one which >> remains in a usable condition is the most economic way to proceed. >> >> -- >> >> >> >> Hope this helps. >> >> Gerry >> ~~~~ >> FCA >> Stourport, England >> Enquire, plan and execute >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >>> for one thing, >>> >>> the larger the pagefile is the >>> greater the fragmentation is - >>> This is a direct correlation. >>> >>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314482/ : "An unfragmented paging >>> file leads to faster virtual memory access and to a greater chance >>> of a dump-file capture that is free of significant errors. " >>> >>> >>> While there are some systems whose performance >>> is negligible in spite of a fragmented disk, there are >>> still many pc's that have an inverse affect >>> between performance and fragmentation. >>> >>> As I eluded to, power users know what >>> to expect from their own machines and know >>> how to maximize their available resources. >>> >>> However my suggestion is made >>> to fix a fundamental problem with a >>> fundamental with low virtual memory messages >>> and presumably being produced >>> on a regular pc of regular pc users. >>> >>> >>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/308417 : For best performance, do >>> not set the initial size to less than the minimum recommended size >>> under Total paging file size for all drives. The recommended size is >>> equivalent to 1.5 times the RAM on your computer. It is good >>> practice to leave the paging file at its recommended size. However, >>> you may increase its size if you frequently use programs that use >>> much memory. >>> >>> Unfortunately my friend I need to move on, >>> I do appreciate that you did not result to >>> using demeaning language. Possibly that is >>> why I took the time to provide the above. >>> >>> It seems that the information >>> above may not apply to your system >>> or to others who have higher expectations >>> from their systems. >>> >>> Unfortunately, not everyone else may >>> be as fortunate. >>> >>> Funny, I frown upon people who make >>> little issues like this into a major project >>> and thesis...... >>> >>> I will have to develop a method to express >>> and dismiss them in a polite manner next time.... >>> >>> <g>
Guest Laughingstar~* Posted August 19, 2007 Posted August 19, 2007 Re: Virtual Memory is too low best to plan your message, minimize content, and edit no more than 5 times. " db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. ." <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:OaIoudb4HHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > >>"jorgen" <na@invalid> wrote in message >>news:%?>23fWQkOa4HHA.5740@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> I wouldn't call it a trap. A couple of guys pointed out that you've >> misunderstood how the system works. It's better to have that cleared up >> instead of going down a wrong road > > the misunderstandings > are yours to have taken this road > and trolling onto this subthread to > show us how wise your are. > > however, it is unfortunate for you that > you also showed us that > you were not wise enough to refrain > from the mal intent and instead provide > a professional response to the original question at hand. > > Something for you to keep in mind: > > "DO NOT ALTER MY POSTINGS OR > ANYONE ELSE'S FOR YOUR SARCASM" > > you should have no misunderstanding now.
Recommended Posts