Tom's Guide | Tom's Hardware | Tom's Games
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Hi,
I've an 80GB SATA HDD, a 320GB SATA HDD and a 200GB IDE HDD. WinXP is installed on the 80GB. Now, I've defined for windows to use all three of them for swap files. When I boot it remembers only the one on the main HDD (the boot drive). I've tried defining exact size on each HDD (min: 1024MB, max: 1024MB) and I've also tried setting it to "System managed". Nothing worked, though the "System managed" setting was not "forgotten" until after one or two boots (windows was using all three drives for swap file) but after another boot the swap files on the other non-boot drives were unused.

'mazing what you can find via a trawl on the www... (google in this case using: swap file on multiple drives - as the search term/string).

It is always amazing to me the misinformation you can find on the internet. If the author had actually MONITORED those pagefile he would have observed that only one was used and the other was just "checked". It is part of the pagefile algorithm to use the fastest pagefile as primary on the system.
Here's the deal. You DO NOT gain performance with multiple or large pagefiles.
Common sense when looking at access speeds of RAM [billionths of a second] vs hard drive access [thousandth of a second] makes it clear that multiple pagefiles or large pagefile do not increase performance. If they did that is a direct pointer that you don't have enough RAM in the system.
Multiple pagefiles is a server optimization technique. BUT it requires special configuration and controllers to work correctly.
True pagefile optimization is where you put the pagefile on a different drive than the OS. This eliminates pagefile and OS disk contention which is what slows both down as they compete for disk io.
The author also missed a major optimization technique of setting the pagefile as static. Again a server optimization technique. By setting the pagefile min and max settings the same you eliminate pagefile fragmentation [very bad for performance] and the consumed cpu cycles to expand and contract the pagefile dynamically.
so put your pagefile on a different disk [does not have to be on a partition by itself since you will set min/max values the same].
Give a person a fish, they eat for a day. Suggest they internet search and they learn a skill for a lifetime.

... I think the first clue was that he refers to it as 'stripping' (instead of striping)
I'm not one of those who think Bill Gates is the devil. I simply suspect that if Microsoft ever met up with the devil, it wouldn't need an interpreter.

Update: I've tried to cancel the page file on my main HDD (by setting "no page file" and by setting its size to 0-0) and it did not work. When I reboot, windows still allocates 1.5GB of page file on the main HDD and does not use the others.
Any ideas?

Bet you didn't hit the "set" button. A very common issue.
You will get a error when you set the pagefile to 0 on your OS drive about not being able to write debug information for a crash dump. I ignore that for the simple reason I have never had a crash dump help me decypher a problem. And believe me I have tried :-0.I
Give a person a fish, they eat for a day. Suggest they internet search and they learn a skill for a lifetime.

PS. Love your sig jboy!
Give a person a fish, they eat for a day. Suggest they internet search and they learn a skill for a lifetime.

wanderer: nicely put...
Incidentally I didn't read the link/ref I posted; 'twas more a "have a look-see/trawl" out there to see how why etc. of pagefiles...; that so as to enourage Warhammer" to also dig/research a little into what's out there...; was offered on the fly
When I dun my mcse aeons ago (NT4 version - remember NT4...) there was great emphasis on putting said file (on a workstation installation) on a separate drive (if possible); putting it into a separate partition on the same drive as the OS was not perceived as of any performance benefit - yet many advocate it (still)... It was a point of philosophical discussion as regards fixing max/min size of said file; but the general concensus was to set the limits - regardless of its location. Also the issue of adequate RAM and access rate versus pagefile access was something one required to understand when dealing with performance etc...
Sadly much of the relevant info does seem to be less promoted/understood these daze by many "out there"...

wanderer - If I were a newbie, that might have been the cause. You lose your bet.
trvlr - If the solution is to STFW and RTFM then what is the purpose of this forum? ;)
Besides, from what I've found so far, applying the "STFW" technique, most explanations do not teach me anything new. The rest are just useless mambo jumbo, whose writers should be executed in the town square, for all to see and fear :)

wanderer...
Occasionally I feel it useful to encourage "folks" to have trawl before (and whilst) posting... as frequently the answer is "out there" already and in detail.
In the process they frequently can/will learn a lot re' the topic; and also about just what is "out there and available"...
I would disagree that much of what is "out there" is mumbo-jumbo; there is wealth of useful, accurate info; and not infrequently one may find oneself referrred to info posted at "this" forum...
Frequently the regulars here advise a given poster to do a little trawling re' their problem as posted; and they also offer solutions too in parallel to the suggested trawls...
Re' - " most explanations do not teach me anything new"...
Whilst that may be true for you and many others (here and elsewhere), there are many who lack your level of knowledge/experience etc. and thus those "explanations" may well be of (great) value to them... The value one places on information is frequently based on the situation, one's level of understanding at the moment in question? If it fixes the problem and you didn't know it previously then it's perceived as valuable and prized highly. If it doesn't and you may already know that provided info.. then naturally one may regard that information somewhat less?
The novice/less well-informed may frequently arrive at forums/fora various in search of help; frequently do not realise that a trawl is also useful to do - in parallel to forum advice. Much useful/accurate/detailed info is "out there"; and it's wise/useful to know where it is, and how to access and use it.
Often a given forum response time may be out of kilter with the posters time zone. Thus a (parallel) trawl may provide solutions/resources that may transcend that time-difference and help the resolve the problem sooner...
"Finally" - it is not unknown for info "out there" to require clarification... It isn't all as well written etc. as it might be; although much of it is well done and accurate etc. ("wot is writ is not alway wot is red/understood..." ) Thus forums/fora like this are useful for clarification etc... and perhaps/frequently input based on more personal experience.

trvlr - OK man, you've just written like 1K words, just to state the obvious. And to support your point, I've stumbled across this forum after about an hour of STFW.
I was (and still am) hoping to find here a better solution then doing what I've already tried (so many times... :< ).
Maybe there is something I'm overlooking, or maybe windows XP is just crap when it comes to using page files in a non-ordinary way, although MS themselves encourage people to set the page file on a different HDD and to use as many HDD's as possible.

I don't see what the problem is! I have 3 HDDs and all I had to do was select No Paging File for 2 of them. Then I deselected System Managed Size in the chosen drive, entered the size and clicked Set.
Ridgewayranger

mmm - 'guess I did go on a little (he sed as an understatement)... I felt that wanderer (for whom I have a high regard) was a little overly down on suggesting trawls etc; and the results of such...
We don't always agree on which/what/why etc... but that's the value/benefit of a forum; a free exchange of ideas and possible (re)solutions - without rancour, prejudice, offence...
And it was very kwiet morning at work, so I had tyme to ruminate...
Incidentally I think I found this (very excellent) forum via a trawl in the early days of yore. It's one three I put in time with - this being the main one.

ridgewayranger - When I set "no paging file" on the boot HDD, on the next boot windows still allocates a huge page file on it. Setting a page file on another HDD, other than the boot does not seem to work since windows does not use it (and uses the one it forces on the boot HDD).

![]() |
![]() |
![]() |

This post is quite old and has been locked from receiving new replies. Please create a new posting instead.
| Ads by Google |