I have 768mb of ram and running xp. would it be good if I moved the page file to a ram disk? say, form a 100mb ramdisk and use 90mb for the page and 10mb for my temp directories..?

or is 768 not enough ram to have a ram disk?

from what I've read, a ram disk page file would be faster than a separate page partition..and I'm all about inexpensive, quick loading times!

only disadvantage I could see with it is it wipes your page file and temp directories after a reboot, but I'm also reading that that's not exactly a bad thing..

I'll be using this ram disk

thanks!

sigh

go ahead, knock yourself out.

No it wouldn`t.

You forget the purpose of the page file is to swap memory to disk when you don`t have enough memory available.

Putting it into ram is self defeating, you will be using up more ram not saving it and have a dramatic reduction in performance, NOT an increase in performance. You will end up with less ram for your programs and thus cause more use of the pagefile #, so your computer will slow down.

There are multiple ways to improve the pagefile performance. Who really knows if any way is better then others. MS says you must have a pagefile where the OS resides. Other people say you should have a pagefile on a seperate HDD, preferably on a seperate controller. I myself have a page file located on the same partition as my OS, and a 2nd pagefile located on a 2nd drive on a 2nd controller.

If you want to speed up boot time, get either SCSI or SATA and use RAID 0.

I do it here, but not on a software based RamDrive.

I use a CENATEK RocketDrive here w/ 2gb of PC-133 SDRAM on it, a "solid-state" ramdrive board w/ RAMChips I insert onto it!



1gb = pagefile (formatted as Fat-32)

&

1gb = temp folder & files, logging!

(All types on the latter in logging that I could put on it from applications (internal to their config., or initialization files & registry hive locations for them), webpage caches from all web-browser programs (formatted as NTFS & compressed to get more than 1gb out of it effectively! I say that, because I am guessing since most of that data is VERY compressable in the form of textual data, I effectively "get more out of it" because of the nature of most of the data (not counting already compressed image data from site pages). Things like webpages being highly compressable in their data in print/text info. etc.)).

That's different though than using a software based one, because it maintains its state between boots via a powersupply if I want (and do use) & is its OWN "separate entity" that doesn't use system RAM chips onboard the mobo, but its OWN ram onboard the card.

* In your case & imo, you don't have enough RAM imo, to pull that off right storing the pagefile.sys there on it!

MAINLY, because of what PeterH stated above.

E.G.-> Let's say you do video editing, or database work (in other words, work with apps that have LARGE RAM requirements), you consume your system RAM that isn't allocated to the ramdrive via software & you start paging into RAM because your pagefile.sys would be on a software ramdisk. Impractical, especially with "only" 768mb onboard your system in physical/actual RAM onboard the mobo.

I.E.-> Background VM memory spaces per application: Each app gets 4gb virtual memory alloted (VM = physical & paged, iirc all RAM is operated on by the OS & memory mgr. AS "virtualized", one process space basically, but is composed of BOTH) to it as its individual process space memory allotment. Of that total 4gb, 2gb is allocatable by each application via API calls for that as maximum afaik (other 2gb iirc is used by OS for mgt. purposes) in std. OS' setups.

(Yes, there is a /3GB switch iirc for boot.ini on builds of NT-based Os' to allow apps (like server-class ones) to access 1gb more for some apps of the normally remaining 2gb used by the OS)

However, typically, this is the case. Again: 2gb allocateable & useable by the app out of its total 4gb "virtualized" memory space available allocated to it (via API calls).

(To do what you're out to do, I would have the 4gb physical RAM in chips onboard the motherboard (4gb = limit typical machines have), or @ least 2-3gb of it, so the OS & apps can survive on the remaining 1gb of 2-4gb total Physical RAM on the mobo... it's said w/ 1gb of RAM by some online? You don't NEED a pagefile.sys setup PERIOD, but I disagree here: Some apps might complain about that, or not install if they check for the presence of one being in existence (pagefile.sys) or even run right!)

EDIT PART -> What you COULD try, if you go this route storing webpage cache data for instance, & temp ops folders/files? Is use an NTFS formatted RamDisk by ArSoft's software for it! This IS because iirc, ArSoft's ramdisk can use NTFS filesystems & that can use data compression for files/folders on it!

That said, you could do as I do, use NTFS compression on its data stored there & it'd be pretty effective for "doubling" your storage in theory for temp ops, logging, & webpage cache data (jpg/gif image data won't gain much, but HTML & text data will & ALOT)!

E.G.-> If you store data there that is HIGHLY COMPRESSABLE (like webpage data, minus jpg/gif type images which are already compressed well)? You might actually GAIN on it, "doubling" that RAM's data storage capacity. That would be a more "practical" application of an NTFS formatted & compressed RamDrive for you imo!

APK

P.S.=> You'd effectively GAIN alot more than storing the pagefile.sys there doing temp ops & webpage HTML cached data there... Pagefile.sys won't compress under NTFS filesystem compression is why! It's alot like its OWN partition & is, afaik, "Raw-Written"... apk

[Edited by Alec§taar on 2005-03-05 09:07:32]

Storing your page file on a ramdrive is retarded. Storing it on a ramdrive that uses a seperate set of RAM is slightly less retarded. Instead of investing in a PCI ramdrive... just invest in more RAM. You'll be a better person for it.

Originally posted by jaylittle:

"Storing your page file on a ramdrive is retarded."

A software based one, with less than 2-4gb of system RAM? It's not a good idea to store pagefile.sys on... if you have more than 2gb of RAM though? It's feasible, depending on the type of work you do!

A 1gb pagefile.sys stored on it COULD be done in theory, depending on the size possible on the Ramdisk software & its stability (best to have a ramdisk stored pagefile.sys on its OWN partition there too, because that simply avoids fragmenting itself, & other data, if other files were stored on that ramdisk).

Again: Dedicated partitions help here as they do on HardDisks.

Nice part about Ramdisks, of any kind? Defragging takes place FAR FASTER than on electro-mechanical harddisk drives (in fact, many orders of magnitude faster: In SECONDS for whole thing too partially due to smaller size (relative term) vs. harddisks, but also largely due to SPEED OF RAM vs. HARDDISK speed being many orders of magnitude slower).

The rest of RAM not dedicated to a software based RamDrive (say 4gb total RAM on his system in physical RAM leaving 3gb RAM left if 4gb total & 1gb used for Software Ramdisk)?

The OS + apps would use.

Depending on how much RAM Your apps & OS use?? 1gb would be enough USUALLY for the OS & programs to use!

(NOW, It's been said online that many use 1gb or more RAM bearing systems with NO PAGEFILE. That I disagree with for reasons stated above in my first post in this thread & will again here: Some apps don't like that & have problems installing even if no pagefile.sys is present... or, have problems running themselves! )

Still, there is better uses for NTFS formatted Ramdisks, I state them above & will again below for you in the bottom most section as the "BOTTOM-LINE":

Originally posted by jaylittle:

"Storing it on a ramdrive that uses a seperate set of RAM is slightly less retarded."

It's not "retarded" @ all!

Mainly because the Solid-State Ramdisk I use by CENATEK does this (software ones can too, but not maintain state typically, unless you use SuperSpeed.com's unit that mirrors to harddisks):

1.) Ramdisks Access files data stored on them FAR faster than electro-mechanical std. harddisks

2.) Ramdrives can be NTFS formatted & data on it be compressed for storage of webpage cache or temp data operations & logging to effectively "double" storage space on it if NTFS formatted if the data is of HTML, .txt, or other highly compressible datatypes.

(Depending on the data type in files stored (txt data from logs & HTML goes past 2-to-1 compression in fact, sometimes far more) you can get alot of miles per gallon out of what is stored on an NTFS compressed volume, by far compared to uncompressed NTFS)

* Software AND hardware ramdisks respond to those 2 points very well too (except software ones usually do not save state of the data, unless SuperSpeed.com's SuperDisk is used) & especially hardware based ones like I have in the CENATEK RocketDrive or even software ones IF NTFS formatted & compressed...

3.) Ramdisks, both hardware & software, CAN SAVE STATE OF DATA ON DISK BETWEEN REBOOTS, if you use SuperSpeed.com's SuperDisk, or a solid-state unit as I do here with backing powersupply by CENATEK!

4.) Solid-State Ramdisks like CENATEK 4gb capable units use their OWN dedicated onboard SDRAM never touching or using SYSTEM RAM for storage either AND can be "striped/spanned" into one LARGE 16gb unit too.

Originally posted by jaylittle:

" Instead of investing in a PCI ramdrive... just invest in more RAM. You'll be a better person for it."

That's an option, & I suggested to him above!

I said that 768mb? Isn't enough to do this with on a software based RamDisk for pagefile.sys storage (since it does not compress pagefile.sys even if NTFS formatted).

However, it can be used VERY effectively and have instantly faster access times than cached data in the system caches does (which takes time & repeat use to become effective & eventually flushes as well) via the diskcache.

Ramdisk data? ALWAYS FAST AS MEMORY, unlike diskcaches, & does not flush like diskcaches (unless system shuts down on software ones... SuperDisk by SuperSpeed.com? Accounts for that, has mirroring to harddisk features & solid-state ones like CENATEK use a backing powersupply of their own).



* AGAIN -> I suggested his using a RAMDrive from ArSoft (which can use NTFS formatting) for webpage caching, temp ops, logging (which much of if not all of it in some cases is text data which compresses excellently via NTFS compression) is a better use of a RamDisk in his case vs. storage his pagefile.sys on it... 768mb of System RAM in physical chips is NOT enough for that pagefile storage on it, & impractical.

APK

P.S.=> Phillip &/or DosFreak, wrote you some "PM's" about this & other posts here so you are aware of some things also... thanks!

Additionally: DosFreak, I see you removed your 2nd post here... why? It looked ok to me about the other types of Ramdisks you have used with BartPE that can be NTFS formatted, but I only skimmed thru it though... what's up, why pull it? apk

[Edited by Alec§taar on 2005-03-05 14:36:56]

/me sighs...

The Page File is typically only used when you run out of physical memory. Instead of storing your Page File on a RAM DISK why not just use those 2 gigs of RAM and supplement the memory on your actual motherboard? This will reduce your reliance upon the page file and any kind of hack (i.e. second power supplies for your memory card or saving the ramdisk data to your hd on shutdown) that will end up costing you far more time than your paging ever did to begin with.

Your statements about the system cache are invalid. Simply put the system cache is stored in RAM, not in the PageFile. The OS isn't going to cache things into SWAP as doing so would be horribly stupid and not help performance in the least.

The only way such a hack would ever be useful is if your machine simply was unable to hold anymore RAM. But if this is the case perhaps you ought to consider buying a machine that can better meet your needs rather than resorting to PCI Ram Drives as way of working around the limitation. No matter what that memory you waste on that PCI RAM Drive will always be better utilized if it is provided to the OS directly as the OS is much more efficient at managing its own memory than you will ever be.

Honestly APK I would think you would understand these concepts better given that you are the author of some sort of memory management utility for Windows. /me snickers...

wow...wasn't expecting all this.....

alec, I knew you had a hardware ram drive. read it somewhere on one of these threads; that's what made me remember about these things. I was originally looking at flash hdd's and pci ram drives a year ago, but I decided against it. I didn't think a flash drive would be good for the os, but maybe I'm wrong.

as to the person who said using ram for your page file and temp folders is retarded; I did it, and photoshop seemed to like it a hell of a lot more than my separate page partition.

this was just a crazy little experiment I decided to do out of lack of sleep and curiosity. plus, I was bored. lol, I did notice though that a couple of my games lagged, so I changed it back....more or less. I just have my temp directories on the ram drive now.

I'm not exactly familiar with this stuff. I'm just working with what knowledge I have, plus a few new facts here and there. I've wanted near-instant boot times, and a lightning-fast page file since I first heard of the ram drive (well, ram disk..saw it on my sister's old mac. kicked ass, it did!) unfortunately, I'm a 17 year old kid with no money. ^^; I'm going to have to wait until I can afford a pci ram drive and/or a flash hdd.

anyway...thanks for the input. I'll keep this software ram drive for my temp directories. and I'll stick to my page partition, only because I can't successfully do what I want with the ammount of ram I have.

hm...maybe steal that 20gb laptop drive from my dell..see what I can do with that....

APK, I removed my other post because you posted "Ramdrives can be NTFS formatted & data", my post was kind of redundant, I was in the process of rewriting my post when you PM me, then I had to close this post so I decided not to repost it.

"
jaylittle

The OS isn't going to cache things into SWAP as doing so would be horribly stupid and not help performance in the least."

IIRC, NT by default pages it's kernel which you can disable through a registry tweak.

Sorry l0st, but someone had to ruin your thread. I'm going to have to close it. I could just delete the offending post but that ruins the context and locking it and saving it is so much better.