i am new to NTFS and page files and was wondering what is best settings to use for this. i have 512 meg micron PC133 and am running a 2 hard drive system. thanx

The recommended amount is between 1.5 and 2x your RAM, but it depends on what apps you use. Photoshop can't be too well fed.
I personally just see what Win2k recommends for my settings and do that on the min and max values. If possible, put it by itself on the first partition of a drive.
I'll tell you right now, this isn't a one-size-fits-all deal; you'll probably get a few different answers.
I'm too lazy to do the simple math, so I just use whatever Windows recommends after the install.

Ok, first let me just clarify something. The page file is not part of NTFS, its simply part of windows. In fact all versions of windows have "virtual memory" ...but in NT/2k/XP, its in the form of a page file.

Now a couple things you need to know about it, and some logical ways to deal with it.

- Its best to create the page file on a fresh hard drive with nothing on it, to insure that the entire page file is created in one section of your harddrive (this increases seek times).

- It is best in most cases to set your Min and Max sizes for the page file to be the same. This way it creates the page file once, and never grows by itself. This way that contiguous file you created above, will never create a new part on a different section of the harddrive.

- Its much better (in most cases) to put the page file on a different drive than your OS is loaded. The reason for this is that when you're using memory, the system is reading and writing to this page file. So....rather than loose the drive performance of a single harddrive reading from both page file, and system/program files at the same time, the page file can be accessed via drive #2, whiles your OS files, and applications can be read/wrote from Drive #1. Does that make sense?

- The actual size I use is equal to the amount of RAM i have, which is 512 MB. I find this to work fine for me. If you have less ram, you should probably use 1 1/2x the ram you have (so for 128 MB RAM, make a 384 MB pagefile)

To further clarify:

"
Ok, first let me just clarify something. The page file is not part of NTFS, its simply part of windows. In fact all versions of windows have "virtual memory" ...but in NT/2k/XP, its in the form of a page file.

Now a couple things you need to know about it, and some logical ways to deal with it.

- Its best to create the page file on a fresh hard drive with nothing on it, to insure that the entire page file is created in one section of your harddrive (this increases seek times). "

I think he meant "reduces" seek times, as that is what you would want.

" - It is best in most cases to set your Min and Max sizes for the page file to be the same. This way it creates the page file once, and never grows by itself. This way that contiguous file you created above, will never create a new part on a different section of the harddrive."

Yep, this is pretty much the case. Why bother letting the OS "burp" the pagefile when YOU know what you want out of it?

" - Its much better (in most cases) to put the page file on a different drive than your OS is loaded. The reason for this is that when you're using memory, the system is reading and writing to this page file. So....rather than loose the drive performance of a single harddrive reading from both page file, and system/program files at the same time, the page file can be accessed via drive #2, whiles your OS files, and applications can be read/wrote from Drive #1. Does that make sense?"

Sort of, however if you are using all IDE devices, that both of the drives in question are on the same chain, moving the pagefile from the system partition/disk will be of little consequence as IDE is not capable of simultaneous reads and writes. Now, if you have a SCSI rig, then this would be highly recommended.

" - The actual size I use is equal to the amount of RAM i have, which is 512 MB. I find this to work fine for me. If you have less ram, you should probably use 1 1/2x the ram you have (so for 128 MB RAM, make a 384 MB pagefile) "

This methodology is fine for initial setup, but I would recommend not making the pagefile any larger than necessary. I use some heavy duty apps that don't even approach my 512MB of RAM, so I use a 150MB size-locked pagefile. Once I get my main workstation running on XP, I will simply disable the pagefile altogether, as I would rather have everything running in RAM than let it go back and forth to my HD. The reason for a pagefile initially, was because most workstations didn't have enough physical RAM to support the OS and applications at the same time. I remember WFW and WinNT 3x boxes running on 8MB of RAM that could barely hang with the OS, let alone anything like a graphics editor. So, the idea was to "add" to the system RAM by using HD space, and it works fine. However, harddrive access times are nowhere near the speed of physical RAM, so this will always be a drawback. The one downside to setting the pagefile to less than the RAM size (or disabling it altogether) is that you will be disabling the ability for the system to write debugging info from a bluescreen to the HD. You can still use the "mini-dump" option though, if that would suffice.

HTH

I just check the little box that say "do not use virtual memory"

I posted this in another post at this place earlier this month
(FROM ANOTHER POST HERE WE DID EARLIER THIS MONTH, HOW I DO IT PERSONALLY, verbatim quote)

Well, I do it this way myself...

1.) PLACEMENT:
=======================

a.)On ScSi:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Into own partition, at start of disk on drive OTHER than the OS disk...

b.)On IDE/EIDE:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Into own partition, at start of second disk on OTHER I/O Ide-Eide cable-channel.

2.) PARTITIONING:
=======================

a.)Why separate partition at start of second disk?
--------------------------------------------------------------------

So your OS & programs drive can be reading/writing/copying/deleting & if needed? The other pagefile disk pages! At start of partition because of the best speed there on the outer tracks!

In its OWN partition at the start of that other drive set STATIC IN SIZE, so it cannot split itself up even on its own partition!

3.) SIZING:
=======================

a.)On Size:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

I follow the "Old-School" rule of 1.5x your RAM, why? Because of the nature of work I do! Even with 256mb-512mb of RAM I have here on both boxes respectively, I run into datasets while coding databases or do some photo edits that get HUGE, so I do not want to run out of RAM!
(Better safe than sorry I say!)

b.)Why Static in Size?
--------------------------------------------------------------------

So it cannot fragment other files, or itself!

(Yes, putting it into its own partition can aid this, especially on DEDICATED TO THAT ONLY, paging/swapping! But, I don't want it splitting up at all, or wasting even a miniscule of CPU time or disk I/O growing or shrinking either!)

If you dual boot? You CAN make Win9x even use the same swapfile with an .ini hack to System.ini & save diskspace... this assumes a common filesystem on that partition also, Fat-16 & for good reason other than compatibility: SPEED ALSO RESULTS!

Plus, NT based Os dual boots can share the pagefile as well. This assumes a common filesystem, and if your partition is 500-700mb or less, Fat-16 is common to both & faster than NTFS or HPFS since it is a small partition, so the pagefile/swapfile gets the benefit as well of that speed!

Sharing it, you SHOULD use a static sized one, same size in BOTH Os types! Why? To avoid fragmentation of say, 9x setting it 300mb & NT based Os setting it 500mb on a dual bootup!

(If same size on both in a dual boot & sharing it (sensible, saves diskspace), make it static & non-resizing!)

* That's been my experience with it for performance sake as well as safety also!

=======================================

http://www.ntcompatible.com/vb/show...file%2Fpagefile

There's not a "hard & fast" set rule on the sizing!

That varies really for how YOU use your machine... at least on the sizing of it!

Diff. folks with diff. kinds of usage patterns & softwares plus datasets need diff. setups! I do it the way I do because of performance benefits & also keeping as safe as I can against 'out of memory' errors!

APK

P.S.=> Some folks, like myself? EVEN STRIPE IT across disks! I do that on my RAID setup! I made a partition for it at the start of that stripeset single logical drive, & that's really one on a "drive" that is composed of 4 Western Digital 40gb ATA-100 EIDE 7200rpm 2mb buffered stripeset disks into 1 logical one! VERY FAST PAGING system with many many disk heads reading/writing to it with multiple (4) fast drives... thru an 8mb buffer no less plus the firmware controlling it at the fastest parts of each drive, the start area outer tracks! apk

"


Sort of, however if you are using all IDE devices, that both of the drives in question are on the same chain, moving the pagefile from the system partition/disk will be of little consequence as IDE is not capable of simultaneous reads and writes. Now, if you have a SCSI rig, then this would be highly recommended.

"

Oops, i forget that no everyone uses SCSI! hehe.

Actually for my new system i'm building in a few months I'm thinking of going with IDE Raid. Any word on the performance of this?

I heard and read that IDE RAID works rather well in both RAID 0 and RAID 1. I don't have a need for that kind of I/O performance as of yet, so I haven't tried it personally.

HighPoint 370 onboard my Abit VP6 DualCPU/SMP Intel rig...

It really really moves!

* Most stable with 4k clusters, not quite as fast as going say, to 64k ones & formatting it like that in NT based Os', but it keeps on 4k ones (I lost the RAID stripe 0 set too many times on 64k). Very stable, & fast...

(I run 4 Western Digital ATA-100 BB type 40gb disks with 2mb buffers on them as a single logical 160gb drive... blows away the fastest disks out there (should! has more read-write heads seeking files striped aross each disk in part... files pickup WAY faster!))

Good Stuff!



APK

P.S.=> Plus, on 4k clusters/sectors & formatted as 4k NTFS, not only is it more stable, it is also defraggeable by ALL defraggers now that use the std. NT API for defragging like Diskeeper & PerfectDisk too! Not only Norton Speedisk which handled the 64k setup fine on it... apk

VP6er here too. I don't have a RAID array going yet, but I think I'm getting a couple of drives for my B-day coming up, at which point I'll try it out. (new article, w00t )