(message (Hello 'kony)
(you :wrote :on '(Thu, 18 Jan 2007 16:23:14 -0500))
(

k> No, pages allocated but never used will not matter, a small
k> amount of paging does NOT speedup anything. The system
k> either has enough (real) memory that it doesn't have to page
k> out (which is ALWAYS faster "IF" the use allows, if it
k> doesn't require too much memory),

it might be true if i run a single application cosuming gigabytes of RAM,
but usage patterns on modern desktop computers are not like that.
i have lots of applications running (74 processes for 2 users), and i don't
need all the processes all the time, certainly. i'm even running two OSes
simultaneously -- Linux in vmware, but i'm working with that Linux from time
to time.
so, i think they'll better be swapped out. as i've said, if some active
process will need more RAM, or if some file operations will need be cached,
Windows will swap out that processes anyway -- but it will swap out it's DLL
and EXE pages if it cannot swap allocated memory to pagefile.
RAM is just a cache for data -- some data is backed by files (executable or
filemappings), some is backed by pagefiles, and some will be not backed by
anything. OS might optimize better when it has flexibility to swap out some
allocated memory that is not used to pagefile. certainly, OS might be wrong
in it's optimizations, so it's questionable..
if you disable pagefile, you give priority to data that is explicitly
allocated by applications that is not backed by anything -- so it's not
swapped even if it's not used because there's no place for it. at same time
some data that is more-or-less actively used -- for example, file cache that
caches filesystem structure MFT -- can be swapped out.

??>> i have 2 GB of RAM and have some small page files. i believe it's more
??>> optimal, but i can't be sure..

k> If the total amount of allocated memory is beyond 2GB, yes
k> it is more optimal. If the total amount is below 2GB, it
k> may depend on how much of a benefit you would see from
k> having a larger filecache (IF you adjust Windows memory
k> management to have one, this is not a default installation
k> condition), it is quite possible the larger filecache
k> reduces rereads from HDD, more than the I/O to HDD from
k> slight pagefile use. In the end, the goal is still the
k> same- based on the specific uses of the system, to minimize
k> access to the HDD.



??>> it's very unlinkely for windows to crash. memory allocation just
??>> fails, and actually application can handle this gracefully. btw
??>> there's one more reason to keep page file size at minimum -- some
??>> applications erroneosly allocate tons of RAM, and with large pagefile
??>> swapping make system non-responsible. with less or no pagefile, those
??>> application will simply honestly report failure..

k> If you're going to have a pagefile active, it should be
k> large enough to handle the entire memory allocation from
k> applications.

why?

)
(With-best-regards '(Alex Mizrahi) :aka 'killer_storm)
"People who lust for the Feel of keys on their fingertips (c) Inity")