Stripping Page File across Multiple Hard drives

This is an incredible tweak that has improved the performance of my
system by leaps and bounds.
There have been lots of articles and tweaks concerning the Page File.
I have tried them all, however... http://online-windows-xp.blogspot.com/

In earlier NT systems it was usual to have such a file on each hard
drive partition, if there were more than one partition, with the idea of
having the file as near as possible to the 'action' on the disk. In XP
the optimisation implied by this has been found not to justify the
overhead, and normally there is only a single page file in the first
instance.

Source: http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm


--



Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


456 wrote:
> This is an incredible tweak that has improved the performance of my
> system by leaps and bounds.
> There have been lots of articles and tweaks concerning the Page File.
> I have tried them all, however...
> http://online-windows-xp.blogspot.com/

"Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%23xgvC98VIHA.4972@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
> In earlier NT systems it was usual to have such a file on each hard
> drive partition, if there were more than one partition, with the idea of
> having the file as near as possible to the 'action' on the disk. In XP
> the optimisation implied by this has been found not to justify the
> overhead, and normally there is only a single page file in the first
> instance.
>
> Source: http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
>
>


If you have enough RAM...
then I doubt if the page file size or placement comes into play anyway

In article <y_KdnWqPn-0azRDanZ2dnUVZ_ualnZ2d@athenet.net>,
philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>"Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:%23xgvC98VIHA.4972@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>
>> In earlier NT systems it was usual to have such a file on each hard
>> drive partition, if there were more than one partition, with the idea of
>> having the file as near as possible to the 'action' on the disk. In XP
>> the optimisation implied by this has been found not to justify the
>> overhead, and normally there is only a single page file in the first
>> instance.
>>
>> Source: http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
>>
>>
>
>
>If you have enough RAM...
>then I doubt if the page file size or placement comes into play anyway
>



Size and placement isn't the issue, it's reads and writes per second.

This is roughly related to "Page Faults" and "PF Delta" in
taskmanager, which can be selected in View/Select Columns

"philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:y_KdnWqPn-0azRDanZ2dnUVZ_ualnZ2d@athenet.net...
>
> "Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:%23xgvC98VIHA.4972@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>
>> In earlier NT systems it was usual to have such a file on each hard
>> drive partition, if there were more than one partition, with the idea of
>> having the file as near as possible to the 'action' on the disk. In XP
>> the optimisation implied by this has been found not to justify the
>> overhead, and normally there is only a single page file in the first
>> instance.
>>
>> Source: http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
>>
>>
>
>
> If you have enough RAM...
> then I doubt if the page file size or placement comes into play anyway
One of my systems: an older XP system with P4 3GHZ and 1.5GB of RAM -
started running pretty slowly. The total memory usage almost never got over
0.5GB...so I just completely disabled the pagefile. After that the system
became much snappier.

Boris