"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:51khbvF1kv72gU1@mid.individual.net...
> GT <ContactGT_remove_@hotmail.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> GT <ContactGT_remove_@hotmail.com> wrote
>
>>>>>> 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 not returned from the swap file to physical ram, so no effect on
>>> performance.
>
>> Fantastic - so windows can now see into the future and knows which pages
>> it will never need, so swaps them out to the page file.
>
> That isnt what Win is doing when you have enough physical
> ram to be able to do without a swap file and have one anyway.
>
>> So your copy of windows can see into the future!!!! Can it predict the
>> lottery numbers as well? Perhaps a weather forcast?
>
> You'll end up blind if you dont watch out, child.

I might go blind if I read any more of your mad ravings!

>> Here's a crazy idea - if you have had your copy of windows modified
>> with a complex algorithm capable of predicting which pages it can
>> swap out of its 2GB of RAM into its swap file, then how about this -
>> just don't load those pages in the first place?!?
>
> Using your mindlessly silly line, if you have 1G of physical ram and are
> seeing some swap file use due to not having enough physical ram, and
> you would have enough physical ram with 2G, there is no point in adding
> the extra, because that wont change how Win uses the swap file.

It has taken 4 days dynaRod and you have finally got it half right... You
are clearly wrong in saying there is no point adding more RAM, but you are
spot on with the final sentence - windows DOES NOT change its algorithm for
swapfile usage based on RAM size. I shall have another attempt to explain
this to you:

If a swapfile exists, windows will use it in an attempt to keep as much
physical RAM available at any one time. In other words, if you have 2GB of
RAM and are using only 400MB, then windows will still insist on swapping
pages out to the pagefile, to keep the available RAM as high as possible. If
something that has been swapped out is then required it is reloaded from the
swapfile, introducing a performance degredation which we have been trying to
tell you about. If you choose to run without a swapfile, then there would be
no performance drop - simple as that.

If all the applications in use manage to fill up the physical RAM as in your
scenario, then the OS starts to use the page file as RAM, causing the
machine to run very slowly indeed, so adding extra RAM WILL fix this
problem, but won't change the algorithm used by windows - under normal
usage, it will continue to swap pages out in an attempt to keep as much
physical RAM available at any one time, so when these pages are required
there is a performance degredation compared with running with no swapfile.

Does that make sense, or would you like to copy and paste, "That isnt what
Win is doing when you have enough physical ram to be able to do without a
swap file and have one anyway." again?