Swapfile

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I have been wondering for some time now, just what good does it do for
Windows to assign all the free space on a hard disk to the swap file and
should I set it to a reasonable number?
I think I understand the swap file's purpose, keeping recently and
frequently used information available and moving it in and out of real
memory.
I have a 40GB drive for Windows and 768MB of RAM.
Should I leave the swapfile at 308454MB, the entire free space? Or should I
limit it to a set amount, say 1GB or a bit less?
Or is there a more reasonable setting?
I ask because I am sick of defragging the drive and watching the swapfile
dominate the placement and fragmentation of data.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

See http://aumha.org/win4/a/memmgmt.htm

Conclusion: Let Windows take care of it.
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE) & Security


Duradan wrote:
> I have been wondering for some time now, just what good does it do for
> Windows to assign all the free space on a hard disk to the swap file and
> should I set it to a reasonable number?
> I think I understand the swap file's purpose, keeping recently and
> frequently used information available and moving it in and out of real
> memory.
> I have a 40GB drive for Windows and 768MB of RAM.
> Should I leave the swapfile at 308454MB, the entire free space? Or should
> I limit it to a set amount, say 1GB or a bit less?
> Or is there a more reasonable setting?
> I ask because I am sick of defragging the drive and watching the swapfile
> dominate the placement and fragmentation of data.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Duradan wrote:
> I have been wondering for some time now, just what good does it do for
> Windows to assign all the free space on a hard disk to the swap file
> and should I set it to a reasonable number?
> I think I understand the swap file's purpose, keeping recently and
> frequently used information available and moving it in and out of real
> memory.
> I have a 40GB drive for Windows and 768MB of RAM.

> Should I leave the swapfile at 308454MB, the entire free space?

You have almost 39.3 GB of "stuff" on your hard drive???
____________

> Or should I limit it to a set amount, say 1GB or a bit less?

Uhhh...308,457 MB *IS* less than 1 GB. Way less.


--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

No. > You have almost 39.3 GB of "stuff" on your hard drive???
That is the swapfile size. It hogs the entire free space on the C: drive.
That is why I was wondering about limiting it to something more reasonable.
When I went to defrag via VOPTDefrag, the swapfile is all over the damned
drive. It seems silly.

"dadiOH" <dadiOH@x-mail.net> wrote in message
news:ucY$$xeRFHA.3096@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Duradan wrote:
> > I have been wondering for some time now, just what good does it do for
> > Windows to assign all the free space on a hard disk to the swap file
> > and should I set it to a reasonable number?
> > I think I understand the swap file's purpose, keeping recently and
> > frequently used information available and moving it in and out of real
> > memory.
> > I have a 40GB drive for Windows and 768MB of RAM.
>
> > Should I leave the swapfile at 308454MB, the entire free space?
>

> ____________
>
> > Or should I limit it to a set amount, say 1GB or a bit less?
>
> Uhhh...308,457 MB *IS* less than 1 GB. Way less.
>
>
> --
> dadiOH
> ____________________________
>
> dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
> ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
> LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
> Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Isn't 308,457 MB an obscenely wrong number? Expecially considering it is a
40GB hard drive anyway. As far as I know, 308,457 MB is close to 300GB.


"Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23TXmv%23eRFHA.2680@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> No. > You have almost 39.3 GB of "stuff" on your hard drive???
> That is the swapfile size. It hogs the entire free space on the C: drive.
> That is why I was wondering about limiting it to something more
reasonable.
> When I went to defrag via VOPTDefrag, the swapfile is all over the damned
> drive. It seems silly.
>
> "dadiOH" <dadiOH@x-mail.net> wrote in message
> news:ucY$$xeRFHA.3096@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > Duradan wrote:
> > > I have been wondering for some time now, just what good does it do for
> > > Windows to assign all the free space on a hard disk to the swap file
> > > and should I set it to a reasonable number?
> > > I think I understand the swap file's purpose, keeping recently and
> > > frequently used information available and moving it in and out of real
> > > memory.
> > > I have a 40GB drive for Windows and 768MB of RAM.
> >
> > > Should I leave the swapfile at 308454MB, the entire free space?
> >
>
> > ____________
> >
> > > Or should I limit it to a set amount, say 1GB or a bit less?
> >
> > Uhhh...308,457 MB *IS* less than 1 GB. Way less.
> >
> >
> > --
> > dadiOH
> > ____________________________
> >
> > dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
> > ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
> > LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
> > Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
> >
> >
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I know, I just got off-topic a bit.


"Jeff Richards" <JRichards@msn.com.au> wrote in message
news:u2fTMTfRFHA.3288@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> VCache is not the swap file. VCache is a figure Windows uses to
determine
> how much of the available virtual address space should be set aside for
> cached pages. The issue with VCache has nothing to do with swap file size
> or swap file settings.
> --

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

dadiOH wrote:
> Duradan wrote:
>> I have been wondering for some time now, just what good does it do
>> for Windows to assign all the free space on a hard disk to the swap
>> file and should I set it to a reasonable number?
>> I think I understand the swap file's purpose, keeping recently and
>> frequently used information available and moving it in and out of
>> real memory.
>> I have a 40GB drive for Windows and 768MB of RAM.
>
>> Should I leave the swapfile at 308454MB, the entire free space?
>
> You have almost 39.3 GB of "stuff" on your hard drive???
> ____________
>
>> Or should I limit it to a set amount, say 1GB or a bit less?
>
> Uhhh...308,457 MB *IS* less than 1 GB. Way less.

*You* wrote MEGAbytes, *I* wrote MEGAbytes but my brain was fixated on
plain ol' bytes. Sorry...

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

"Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23TXmv%23eRFHA.2680@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...

> You have almost 39.3 GB of "stuff" on your hard drive???
> That is the swapfile size. It hogs the entire free space on the C: drive.
> That is why I was wondering about limiting it to something more
reasonable.

Simplest cure:
1. / start / settings / control panel / system / performance
and wriite down where Virtual Memory (swap file) was previously
assigned. You can reassign it to whatever logical drive you prefer.
Otherwise let Windows manage it.
2. Boot or shell to DOS and delete the old WIN386.SWP
(swap file.
3. Boot Windows. The process will create a new (empty)
swap file where you assigned in #1.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Simple solution, requires hardware.
Scsi controller w/scsi bios enabled and 4GB scsi hard drive. One formattted
partition only Put the swapfile on this.

Separate hard drive prevents simultaneous access problems. Separate
controller prevents simultaneous bus access problems. Scsi seems best at
the latter. Since the swapfile is in a different physical location, it will
not affect the fragmentation of your boot partition. OT: This also works
with XP, but the swapfile location assignment requires a bit more tweaking
than 9X as XP can do two locations simultaneously and additive, one being
the XP windows partition.

You may have similar results with an add-on ide controller and smallish hard
drive and a 4GB partition at the front of the HD freespace, assuming the
hard drive has no partitions. Put the swapfile in this formatted partition.

Otherwise, leave the swapfile alone.

The large amount of space is not the swapfile size you're mentioning. Its
the available space on the partition that the swapfile have available for
use. The swapfile will never grow that large. A realtime method of
determining the swapfile size is to open windows explorer and find
win386.swp file. The swapfile may be either in the root of C: or in the
C:\windows directory. This is the swapfile for win9x/ME.

All of this is unrelated to vcache.

"Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23rIZDgeRFHA.164@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I have been wondering for some time now, just what good does it do for
> Windows to assign all the free space on a hard disk to the swap file and
> should I set it to a reasonable number?
> I think I understand the swap file's purpose, keeping recently and
> frequently used information available and moving it in and out of real
> memory.
> I have a 40GB drive for Windows and 768MB of RAM.
> Should I leave the swapfile at 308454MB, the entire free space? Or should
I
> limit it to a set amount, say 1GB or a bit less?
> Or is there a more reasonable setting?
> I ask because I am sick of defragging the drive and watching the swapfile
> dominate the placement and fragmentation of data.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I realise it was a little off topic, but I cannot see where there was a
claim on the page you were referred to that "altering the vcache in Win98 is
NEVER adviseable under any circumstances". There are plenty of claims that
limiting the swap file size is never advisable under any circumstances, and
that's why I though you were confusing the two.
--
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
"Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eR1ZoifRFHA.2976@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I know, I just got off-topic a bit.
>
>
> "Jeff Richards" <JRichards@msn.com.au> wrote in message
> news:u2fTMTfRFHA.3288@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> VCache is not the swap file. VCache is a figure Windows uses to
> determine
>> how much of the available virtual address space should be set aside for
>> cached pages. The issue with VCache has nothing to do with swap file
>> size
>> or swap file settings.
>> --
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

"Duradan" <duradan428@hotmail.com> wrote:


>That is the swapfile size. It hogs the entire free space on the C: drive.
>That is why I was wondering about limiting it to something more reasonable.
>When I went to defrag via VOPTDefrag, the swapfile is all over the damned
>drive. It seems silly.
>

That would be the *theoretical maximum* size for the swap file, equal
to the amount of available free space on the hard drive. In other
words it is a euphemism for "no maximum".

If it will make you feel better you can, without undue risk, go into
the virtual memory settings and change the maximum size to 2048 mb (=
2gb).

As Windows 98 is incapable of using more than 2 gb of swap file space
under any circumstances limiting it to this value will have no impact
on the memory management in Windows 98.

It will also produce no benefits whatever, except perhaps for your own
peace of mind.

Good luck


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
http://aumha.org/alex.htm