Re: Any Reason To NOT Clear Paging File on Reboot?

From: Jim (null_at_null.com)
Date: 03/28/04 

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 17:22:57 -0800

Hmm... I have 1GB of RAM, and have completely ELIMINATED the paging file!!!

Folks, the point is being missed here. Once you start hitting the paging
file, finding ways to "optimize" it is like rearranging the deck chairs on
the Titanic, a useless exercise. Instead, you need a "lifeboat", or in this
case, MORE RAM!!!

The paging file is a BARBARIC solution to a fundamental problem, not enough
memory. If our systems had UNLIMITED memory, we wouldn't even need a paging
file. The paging file is simply a last gasp effort to keep a system
running, that due to a shortage of RAM, would otherwise have to turn belly
up. So MS throws you a lifeline which doesn't amount to much more than a
means to tread water. Once you start routinely accessing the paging file,
it's time to realize your "in the water" and invoke your survival skills.

Now that I've beaten that metaphor to death ;) ...

If you believe that you would benefit from optimizing the paging file
(because in fact you are hitting it), then by definition, you have too
little RAM. If on the other hand, you do NOT believe you would benefit from
optimization of the paging file (because in fact you are NOT hitting it),
all those optimizations don't amount to a hill of beans. IOW, the paging
file is the canary in the coal mine. You're trying to revive the canary,
meanwhile, gas is collecting in the mine! (I knew I could squeeze one more
metaphor in there!)

Because I *never* even come close to hitting the 1GB threshold on my system,
it's POINTLESS to even have a paging file, so I've deleted it (it's now an
option under XP, precisely because many people are commonly using large
amounts of RAM these days, something that was far more unusual even a couple
years ago). Of course, if I did memory intensive operations, like
audio/video editing, I might very well find myself much closer to the 1GB
limit than I currently do. In that case, I might employ a paging file, but
only as a safety measure. If this happened routinely, then it's time to get
MORE RAM and eliminate the paging file again (i.e., if I see the canary fall
over, I'm running for the exit).

Unless you have unusual circumstances, such as the inability to upgrade your
memory (too costly, no more slots, older PC w/ limitied upgrade options,
etc.), then the CORRECT solution is more RAM. When I hear someone with 1GB
talking about creating a paging file, it makes me wonder whether these
concepts are understood. In *most* instances, people w/ 1GB and more of RAM
do NOT need a paging file, it's pointless. In fact, it will actually REDUCE
your system efficiency, because even when you have sufficient RAM, Windows
will try to use the paging file *if* it's present, iow, even when it doesn't
really need to. By eliminating the paging file, you *force* Windows to use
available RAM at all times, thereby actually increasing efficiency.

HTH

Jim

"Karl Burrows" <kfb1@spambellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:eko9c.15127$b_2.9738@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
> I have 1GB of RAM, so I tried to set it to 1.5 times the RAM hoping to
> optimize. I guess I'll just leave the defaults and see how it does.
>
> Thanks for all the help!!
>
> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
> news:eYIgWfEFEHA.2600@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > In news:sWl9c.17269$gZ3.10786@bignews3.bellsouth.net,
> > Karl Burrows <kfb1@spambellsouth.net> typed:
> >
> > > I set the paging file to a fixed amount of 1536MB minimum and
> > 3072MB
> > > maximum trying to optimize my throughput.
> >
> >
> > How big a page file you need to depends on how much RAM you have
> > and what apps you run, but for almost everyone, a minimum of
> > 1536MB is greatly excessive. Most people would never need to use
> > that much, and making it that big won't optimize anything.
> >
> > On the other hand, other than wasting a little disk space, it
> > doesn't really hurt you.
> >
> > --
> > Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> > Please reply to the newsgroup
> >
> >
>
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Do I need a Page File?
    ... paging out physical memory or not. ... Can I do that or does Windows XP really need the ... > require the paging file, ... > unlimited amounts of RAM, we wouldn't even NEED a paging file. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: upgrading memory
    ... what is in memory has to be written on the disk and the new ... Although this is paging, it's essentially one-time paging, usually ... and it doesn't use the CPU and it doesn't page. ... Additional RAM might help some, but how just much it'll help mostly ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics)
  • Re: RAM help!
    ... I did NOT say adding memory is always good. ... the need for paging. ... Adding RAM eliminates the need for paging. ... with 512MB of memory each and 3GB's of installed RAM. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: upgrading memory
    ... This is known as virtual memory. ... Additional RAM might help some, but how just much it'll help mostly ... Your P-III CPU may act in a similar fashion as your increased RAM ... it will be because it reduces or eliminates paging ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics)
  • Re: Is it possible to tell W2K to use only RAM?
    ... > I have 1GB of RAM in my W2K based system. ... I don't want the system use a paging file. ... > PHYSICAL MEMORY AVAILABLE. ... > plenty of the MUCH faster one? ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.general)