[snip]

>> Let me summarise:
>> It is a fact that reading a page from virtual memory will be slower than
>> reading a page from physical RAM.
>
> Not when you have enough physical ram to be able
> to do without a swap file and have one anyway.
>
>> It is a fact that Windows will use a swapfile if one is present,
>> regardless of the amount of physical RAM in the system.
>
> That's the only bit you did manage to get right and is no news.

Right then we are talking here about a system with 2GB of RAM, which can
operate without a swapfile. You agree with the second point here - that
windows will use a swapfile whether it needs to or not, so pages will be
swapped out from RAM to hard disk. But in your first argument here, you say
that reading pages in from that swapfile will be just as fast as reading
them from RAM. Please explain to the group how your hard disk can read pages
at the same speed as RAM?

Please don't tell me you are trying to suggest that windows swaps pages out
to virtual memory, then stores that virtual memory in physical RAM in the
form of a cache? That is plain ludicrous!



>> It is a fact that swapping out to virtual memory while the user is
>> working will have an impact on performance
>
> Win doesnt do that when you have enough physical ram
> to be able to do without a swap file and have one anyway.

Windows will swap pages out to a swap file if one is present regardless of
the amount of RAM in a system. If this happens while the user is working,
there will be an impact on performance.




>> It is a fact that swapping out to virtual memory in the background
>> will NOT affect the performance from the user's point of view
>
> What I said.

So you agree again that windows will swap pages out to a swap file if one is
present regardless of the amount of RAM in a system.




>> It is a fact that if any page required by the OS or an application is
>> in virtual memory, then the performance of that particular operation
>> will be slowed than if the page had been in physical RAM.
>
> Not when you have enough physical ram to be able
> to do without a swap file and have one anyway.

You contradict yourself again - you agree that pages will be swapped out to
virtual memory, but you think they will be loaded again at RAM speed?



>> With no swap file, everything loaded will always be in physical RAM and
>> accessed at maximum speed.
>
> Just as true when you have enough physical ram to be
> able to do without a swap file and have one anyway.
>
>> With a swap file, not everything loaded will always be in physical RAM
>> so there will be an innevitable performance reduction,
>
> Wrong.

Actually it is a fact, so replying with a single word just makes you look
silly!



>> which will be measurable when pages are swapped back into physical RAM
>
> Win doesnt do that when you have enough physical ram
> to be able to do without a swap file and have one anyway.

Yes it does - we have told you that.


>> and measurable when pages are swapped into virtual memory concurrently
>> with other user activity.
>
> Win doesnt do that when you have enough physical ram
> to be able to do without a swap file and have one anyway.


Yes it does - we have told you that.


>> So with the swapfile turned on, windows will use it
>
> Yes.

Ah, that same self-contradiction again. You agree that windows uses the
swapfile, but can somehow load pages back from it without performance
degradation!!!


>> and the performance of the PC will be slightly reduced.
>
> Nope.
>
>> With the swapfile turned off, windows cannot use it,
>
> You quite sure you arent one of those rocket scientist pig ignorant
> children ?

Ah he has been reduced to insults - the sign of a lost argument!