2 HDs - where to put Pagefile.sys?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nananana
  • Start date Start date
N

Nananana

Hi.
I have 2 disks:
1 - partitioned to C: D:
2 - single partition E:

Where should I put Pagefile.sys for best performance?
How should I define this in CP System applet?
TIA
 
It is recommended to put the page file on the OTHER disk to inprove disk
performance on the C:\ drive, where the E:\ drive would have the pagefile.sys
file.

In XP SP2 go to System Properties (Right click on My Computer - Properties)
and select the Advanced Tab and then select the top Settings button for
Performance. Select the bottom Change button on the Advanced tab in
Performance Options window.

You can then choose where to put the page file and how large you want it,
you select it to be system managed size. I forget how large you want it,
like 3 times your memory or something.
 
Nananana said:
Hi.
I have 2 disks:
1 - partitioned to C: D:
2 - single partition E:

Where should I put Pagefile.sys for best performance?
Click to expand...


Normally E would be best. Putting the Page File on a second partition (D: in
your case) is not a good idea, and can hurt your performance. What it does
is move the page file to a location on the hard drive distant from the other
frequently-used data on the drive. The result is that every time Windows
needs to use the page file, the time to get to it and back from it is
increased.

Putting the page file on a second *physical* drive (E:) is a good idea,
since it decreases head movement.. A good rule of thumb is that the page
file should be on the most-used partition of the least-used physical drive.
For almost everyone with a single drive, that's C:.

Also, if you move the major part of the page file to E:, leave a small page
file on C: (2MB initial; 50MB maximum); without this, problems can occur.

But most people these days have enough RAM to not need to use the page file
much. If you fall into that category, it doesn't make much of a difference
either way, wherever you put it.

For more info, read this article by the late MVP Alex Nichol: "Virtual
Memory in Windows XP" at http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
 
Contentious question.

The pagefile should be on the system drive or if one of your hard drives is
significantly fast than the other then put it on it.

However, how much RAM do you have. Best computer performance is determined
by enough RAM for your needs, that will minimise pagefile usage. Even if you
put it on the fastest drive you will not notice any performance increase in
performance although I am absolutely convinced some will disagree. You would
have to be using a lot of virtual memory and have one very fast hard drive
and one very slow hard drive for you to notice the difference between to
two.

I would say leave it on the system drive but make it system managed. I bet
if you try it on all your partitions for a day or so each you wont notice
any difference. Right click 'my computer' | properties | advanced tab |
performance settings | virtual memory change. Set to system manage and click
set and ok your way out.
 
Thanks for all the replies.

"No paging file" for D: ended up with a 400MB pagefile.sys on D:.
Eventually I set it to 2-50MB.

Has anyone seen this odd behaviour?

TIA
 
Nananana said:
Thanks for all the replies.

"No paging file" for D: ended up with a 400MB pagefile.sys on D:.
Eventually I set it to 2-50MB.

Has anyone seen this odd behaviour?
Click to expand...

Hi
Although I have not seen this particular oddity, I have experienced
quite a number of unexpected characteristics of PageFile management,
such as:

1. Cannot set initial PF size to less than 10 MB (although stated
minimum is 2 MB). If I try to input anything less than 10 MB, the
allocated PF
size goes to 1.5*RAM (1534 MB in my case).
However, I have seen on just ONE occasion where the PF initial size did
actually go to 2 MB when requested but I have never been able to
repeat this.

2. When the PF size is set at 1534 MB, the actual usage is generally in
the region of 15-25 MB. However, when I reduce the initial size to, for

example, something like 50 MB, I see the usage increase to perhaps 40
MB. If I subsequently increase the initial size to 100 MB, the usage
seems to follow and reaches 80 MB. And so on.

3. Although I always have input a maximum PF size greater than that of
the initial size (e.g. 50-100 MB), setting a low initial size of, say
50 MB will always lead to a warning message stating that the virtual
memory is low. However, I have never actually seen where the computer
takes
advantage of the fact that I have set a maximum value considerably
higher than the initial size (about which it was complaining).

I am also puzzled about the fact that the PF usage shown in the Task
Manager is always very much higher than that exhibited by Bill James'
PF tool (http://billsway.com/notes_public/winxp_tweaks/). The
latter seems much more realistic to me.

All-in-all, I have never experienced even the slightest discernible
performance improvement from fiddling around with my PageFile size
although this is possibly because I have 1 GB of RAM.

Paul

TIA
Paul

Dell 4550 Desktop
WinXP Home SP2
CPU P4, 2.53 GHz
1.0 GB RAM
Int HD 80 GB ntfs, non-partitioned
Ext HD 160 GB ntfs, non-partitioned
Ext HD 250 GB ntfs, 4 partitions
 
Hi
I am also puzzled about the fact that the PF usage shown in the Task
Manager is always very much higher than that exhibited by Bill James'
PF tool (http://billsway.com/notes_public/winxp_tweaks/). The
latter seems much more realistic to me.

Paul

TIA
Paul
Click to expand...


Windows Task Manager shows not only actual page file usage but the read
ahead allocation (memory it might need) whereas Bill James tool only shows
actual page file usage. There is a good page here that tells you about page
file usage.

http://www.aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
 
Back
Top