how to make use of RAM efficiently?

[Spencer]

You can also download Cacheman at Tweakfiles.com.

[PrimalX]

can someone please post the line to add to system.ini so win9x can use RAM efficiently. I lost it a while ago.

I think something like

ConserveSwapFile=1

somthng like that..

[Beemer]

place in the system.ini under

[386Enh]
ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1

Cheers!
Edit: fixed it in case someone else stumbles accross it.

[This message has been edited by Beemer (edited 12-16-2000).]

[PrimalX]

tankill belly huge.

[PrimalX]

nah, it does't work. Still I have lots of ram left (around 170mb) while my swap file keeps on growing.

Is there any typo or anything??

[waferdog]

Did you set a static swap file size? I think the rule is to set the swap file min-max at 2.5 times the amount of ram (if you have 128 MB of RAM, set your swap file at 320 minimum and 320 maximimum). You might want to consider doing this after a defrag, so that your swap file is not fragmented from the start. There are a whole bunch of other things to do, but I won't type them here.

[waferdog]

Also, he apparently missed the "a" in the system.ini heading. It should be

ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1

Look around this site for more info (do a search for swap file):
http://members.aol.com/axcel216/index.htm

[Beemer]

Sorry about that Chief! There's that speeling thing again.
With creating a swap file, I heard that Win 98 handles it better with 128 Meg's of ram or more...This is from the KB
I read this on a few sites in the past. Does anyone have proof to the contrary?

I am under the impression that 250 min and max or 300 min and max would be more than anyone would need.

Do not trust the ancient rule telling to give a value minimum and maximum to your
Virtual Memory equal to 2.5 times your RAM. This was valid when computers had very little amounts of RAM. Win3.1/95 and 16 wopping Meg's of ram. Now a-days most have ample enough RAM to designate large swap files to accomadate some or lots of programs running at once.

To figure out how big you need to make your Swap File you can use System Monitor. At the end of a half hour session of using the programs that consume lots of RAM you will get a read out and add aprox. 50 me's for insurance. After setting up your swap file settings and your swap file is to small you will get an "Out Of Memory" love note from the system.

Definately do a defrag before creating your swap. 2.5 times is good if you are doing little things. If you want to run multiple app's when creating web pages and graphics and all on the fly you will need a little more than that depending on your ram amount. I have 32 meg's here, (I know....) and I use 300 and 300. This works pretty good as my file system doesn't get pushed around at all. I run quite a few app's when creating pages.

Cheers!

[This message has been edited by Beemer (edited 12-13-2000).]

[Biff]

I'm with beemer on this one! I think the rule of thumb no longer applies once we pass the old days of having 8 or 16 megs ram. Myself I use a fixed size swap file of 300meg. Ideally you would want to use a defrag program (like Nortons) that would write this to the outside of the disk for quicket access. Myself I would rather have it wherever, than install Norton apz, but thats my own preference, your milage may vary! I set up a swap file right after a clean install, reboot then defrag (I do that on the premise that it will be on the most outer part of the drive possible. I then install the rest of my apz
Biff

[Mr. Mojo Risin]

Ok, for the swap file I am assuming that you are all talking about the virtual memory window in system setting?? I have never done this but would it be strange to use my D:\ drive for my swap?? I only ask because I use GoBack to track all file changes on my C:\ drive and it also happens to track the swap file everytime it grows and shrinks... I was thinging that maybe if my swap was on my D:\ drive that this wouldn't be a factor of slowing my system down... Any Pro's out there wanna let me know if this is a good/bad idea?

I have 192MB 100 SDRAM on Win98se
HD's are both 7200rpm on the same IDE

Sorry for jumping in on this thread

[Gutter Ball]

Mojo: That's a great idea. I also have a dedicated partition on my HD for a Swap File! It's set at 320max/min (Photoshop likes big swap files) so it doesn't keep changing on me. It's just "neater" this way. I dunno if it's faster or not though

[NDC]

Trust me GutterBall, it is faster when you consolidate the pagefile to its own partition. The reason?

(1) The page file won't get fragged up (page file gets fragged up too)

(2) The program that needs to write to pagefile won't need to search for the pagefile among other datas such as saved data, system files, OS, applications, etc.. It will have its own dedicated partition.


NOTE: Having a Pagefile on a different disk will give you better performance than having it on the same disk as the programs and OS. I'm running two dedicated partitions for pagefile on a SCSI 10,000rpm drive and an IDE 7,200rpm drive.

I've been running my system this wy for over 5 years and there isa significant difference over running page file on the same partition as the OS, APPS, or Saved DATA.

[This message has been edited by NDC (edited 12-14-2000).]

[Biff]

Thats a awesome idea NDC, it's own partition WOW. Do you have your O/S and Apz on the same partition. I'm thinking of going to win2k and a format & clean install is leaving me with all kinds of options, i'd be open to. Could you give us a description of your setup?
Biff

[BFlurie]

The ideas above are very good. Something to remember, tho, at least w/W9X, if you have 128 MB or more, unless you're running intensive apps, you're probably hardly even using the swapfile. NT-style systems use it much more frequently. To monitor w/W9X, run Sysmon & set to monitor at least "Swapfile in Use". Minimize that & run your most intensive apps you would normally run. Then maximize Sysmon & see.

[NDC]

Could you give us a description of your setup?

Here is my system specs:

Dual Pentium 3 800Mhz @ 896Mhz
Tyan S1832-DL Dual Board
1GB PC-100 SDRAM (4 x 256MB)
Geforce 256DDR+ 32MB
Adaptec 29160N Ultra160 SCSI Adapter
Seagate 18.4GB Ultra160 Cheetah 10,000rpm
WD 13.6GB UDMA66 7,200rpm
Maxtor 30.6GB UDMA100 7,200rpm
SCSI Zip250
Teac 32x CDROM
Plextor 8/4/32 CDRW


It might look rather strange to you because the language you see isn't English. I'm using a Korean Version of Win2K because the job that I do requires full compatibility with Korean Fonts and certain programs..


Here is how my partition is setup:


<IMG SRC="http://www.geocities.com/ndcmj/hddpartition.jpg" border=0>


SCSI 10,000rpm

(C) 2.01GB FAT32 (Dedicatd to OS only)

(D) 4.00GB NTFS (Dedicated to Apps only)

(E) 10.11GB NTFS (Dedicated for Workspace)

(Z) 996MB NTFS (Dedicated to 1st Fixed Page file)

IDE-0 7,200rpm

(Y) 1.00GB NTFS (Dedicated to Fixed 2nd Page File)

(F) 11.73GB NTFS (Dedicated to saved Data)


IDE-1 7,200rpm

(X) 28.62GB NTFS (Dedicated to junk such as MP3's, Program disks, Backup, etc... and also used to transport my work to office when Zip250 can't handle it)


Most of you won't need this much RAM or Page File partition that large. The reason I have my Page File partitions so large is because I work with large image files that are sometimes 500MB + and 1GB RAM just can't cut it when opening multiple image files and multi-tasking between programs and another reason is to double the Page File size to the amount of RAM I have incase I get a memory dump during a system crash. The reason that you set the page file to 1x or 1.5x to the size of your memory is so that the RAM can do a full memory dump to the page file incase of a system crash or failure. If you use your computer for general purposes, the Page File partition(s) I've made will just be a waste of disk space.

************************************************** *************


Here is another thing you can do to optimize your Win2K and NT4 settings (this setting is valid for systems with at least 128MB Physical RAM:


HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEMS\CURRENTCONTROLSET\CONTR OL\SESSIONMANAGER\MEMORY MANAGEMENT\

DisablePagingExecutive=1
IOPageLockLimit= 1028 (default is 0=512kb for Win2K Pro & 0=1028 for Win2K Server)
LargeSystemCache=1


You will notice a BIG difference in Disk Performace when you set the IOPageLockLimit from the default value of 0 which equals 512kb to between 1024 ~ 2048 etc. I would recommend setting it to 1024 if you have 128MB, if less, leave it 0. If you have over 128MB RAM, you can play around with it to get it to it's optimal performance. I have mine set to 2048.

If you would like to see the difference in disk performance, try copying a large file, say about 300MB to another disk or folder with the default settings and try doing the same thing after you change the setting from 0 to 1024. You will notice that the meter that shows how much of the file has been copied will disappear alot quicker! The disk will be spinning, but the task will be finished in the GUI. You will especially notice a BIG difference on programs such as Photoshop and other programs that require heavy disk access.


[This message has been edited by NDC (edited 12-15-2000).]