Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

Thanks for the reply, but that did not help me. The page you recommended is
a good page for learning what a paging file is, how it works, and gives tips
to the reader, but does not answer my question.

Will Windows XP (Pro) work better if there were TWO paging files, running
simultaneously on two different drives, instead of just one?

The idea is, if Windows works better using ONE paging file, why not TWO
paging files for a performance boost? (Like Twin Turbo in a car, versus
Single Turbo. Twin Turbo is much faster.) In theory, two paging files should
work better then one, but will it help Windows any? Thanks again.


"Will Denny" wrote:

> Hi
>
> Please have a look at the following article by Alex Nichol:
>
> "Virtual Memory in Windows XP"
> http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.php
>
> --
>
> Will Denny
> MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
> Please reply to the News Groups.
>
>
> "DRoberts777" <DRoberts777@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:1F6D60BB-F348-46CD-B4AF-2068CE26D069@microsoft.com...
> > Is it possible for Windows XP (Pro) to work with two paging files
> > simultaneously, one on two different drives? The idea being to improve
> > system performance by having two paging files to work with versus just
> > one. Thanks in advance.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

You will find some advice from Microsoft here:
http://snipurl.com/dbpo

--


Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FCA

Using invalid email address

Stourport, Worcs, England
Enquire, plan and execute.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please tell the newsgroup how any
suggested solution worked for you.

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"DRoberts777" <DRoberts777@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B7A1F39F-D8B9-438C-A486-0486745BE3D1@microsoft.com...
> Thanks for the reply, but that did not help me. The page you
> recommended is
> a good page for learning what a paging file is, how it works, and
> gives tips
> to the reader, but does not answer my question.
>
> Will Windows XP (Pro) work better if there were TWO paging files,
> running
> simultaneously on two different drives, instead of just one?
>
> The idea is, if Windows works better using ONE paging file, why not
> TWO
> paging files for a performance boost? (Like Twin Turbo in a car,
> versus
> Single Turbo. Twin Turbo is much faster.) In theory, two paging files
> should
> work better then one, but will it help Windows any? Thanks again.
>
>
> "Will Denny" wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Please have a look at the following article by Alex Nichol:
>>
>> "Virtual Memory in Windows XP"
>> http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.php
>>
>> --
>>
>> Will Denny
>> MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
>> Please reply to the News Groups.
>>
>>
>> "DRoberts777" <DRoberts777@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:1F6D60BB-F348-46CD-B4AF-2068CE26D069@microsoft.com...
>> > Is it possible for Windows XP (Pro) to work with two paging files
>> > simultaneously, one on two different drives? The idea being to
>> > improve
>> > system performance by having two paging files to work with versus
>> > just
>> > one. Thanks in advance.
>

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

Hello, I have WindowsXP Home and two hard drives on my unit. Default page
file setup, Windows controls. Found that Windows in this configuration
created a second page file on the second hard drive, it uses 1.5 times ram to
set size, also a update temp folder and msdownload folder.
Hope this is of some use.
Take Care.
beamish.


"DRoberts777" wrote:

> Thanks for the reply, but that did not help me. The page you recommended is
> a good page for learning what a paging file is, how it works, and gives tips
> to the reader, but does not answer my question.
>
> Will Windows XP (Pro) work better if there were TWO paging files, running
> simultaneously on two different drives, instead of just one?
>
> The idea is, if Windows works better using ONE paging file, why not TWO
> paging files for a performance boost? (Like Twin Turbo in a car, versus
> Single Turbo. Twin Turbo is much faster.) In theory, two paging files should
> work better then one, but will it help Windows any? Thanks again.
>
>
> "Will Denny" wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > Please have a look at the following article by Alex Nichol:
> >
> > "Virtual Memory in Windows XP"
> > http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.php
> >
> > --
> >
> > Will Denny
> > MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
> > Please reply to the News Groups.
> >
> >
> > "DRoberts777" <DRoberts777@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:1F6D60BB-F348-46CD-B4AF-2068CE26D069@microsoft.com...
> > > Is it possible for Windows XP (Pro) to work with two paging files
> > > simultaneously, one on two different drives? The idea being to improve
> > > system performance by having two paging files to work with versus just
> > > one. Thanks in advance.
>

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

If you are looking for a significant increase in performance, get more real
RAM. XP responds very well to more RAM, at least up to 512 Meg, more if you
do a lot of graphics.

However, first see whether you are even using all of the the RAM you
currently have. Startup a few application, whatever is "normal" for you.
Then, do a a single CTRL-ALT_DEL to invoke the XP task manager. Click the
perfomrance tab and see the RAM usage.

If you are using nearly all the RAM, and most of the pagefile, then some
additional memory (RAM or pagefile) is obviously needed.

As for where the pagefile is located, the best place is on a different hard
drive than XP is located, ideally on your fastest/newest hard drive. If
that is not practical, then on a different partition.

I have never heard that two page files is better than one page file of the
same (summed) size.


"DRoberts777" <DRoberts777@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B7A1F39F-D8B9-438C-A486-0486745BE3D1@microsoft.com...
> Thanks for the reply, but that did not help me. The page you recommended
> is
> a good page for learning what a paging file is, how it works, and gives
> tips
> to the reader, but does not answer my question.
>
> Will Windows XP (Pro) work better if there were TWO paging files, running
> simultaneously on two different drives, instead of just one?
>
> The idea is, if Windows works better using ONE paging file, why not TWO
> paging files for a performance boost? (Like Twin Turbo in a car, versus
> Single Turbo. Twin Turbo is much faster.) In theory, two paging files
> should
> work better then one, but will it help Windows any? Thanks again.
>
>
> "Will Denny" wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Please have a look at the following article by Alex Nichol:
>>
>> "Virtual Memory in Windows XP"
>> http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.php
>>
>> --
>>
>> Will Denny
>> MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
>> Please reply to the News Groups.
>>
>>
>> "DRoberts777" <DRoberts777@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:1F6D60BB-F348-46CD-B4AF-2068CE26D069@microsoft.com...
>> > Is it possible for Windows XP (Pro) to work with two paging files
>> > simultaneously, one on two different drives? The idea being to improve
>> > system performance by having two paging files to work with versus just
>> > one. Thanks in advance.
>

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

"Bob Harris" <rharris270[SPAM]@hotmail.com> wrote:

>If you are looking for a significant increase in performance, get more real
>RAM. XP responds very well to more RAM, at least up to 512 Meg, more if you
>do a lot of graphics.
>
>However, first see whether you are even using all of the the RAM you
>currently have. Startup a few application, whatever is "normal" for you.
>Then, do a a single CTRL-ALT_DEL to invoke the XP task manager. Click the
>perfomrance tab and see the RAM usage.
>
>If you are using nearly all the RAM, and most of the pagefile, then some
>additional memory (RAM or pagefile) is obviously needed.
>
>As for where the pagefile is located, the best place is on a different hard
>drive than XP is located, ideally on your fastest/newest hard drive. If
>that is not practical, then on a different partition.

That is not correct. There are specific circumstances in Windows XP,
such as the system failure memory dumps, which *require* the presence
of a paging file on the boot drive.

>I have never heard that two page files is better than one page file of the
>same (summed) size.
>

You have now. See the article by the late Alex Nichol MVP at
http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP"

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

"...the late Alex Nichol MVP"?

Say it isn't so! I never met the man, but he taught me a great deal about
computing. Is he really gone?

Modem Ani

"Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:u7iv21l053ko9dumo34edivfugckv06q1m@4ax.com...
> "Bob Harris" <rharris270[SPAM]@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >If you are looking for a significant increase in performance, get more
real
> >RAM. XP responds very well to more RAM, at least up to 512 Meg, more if
you
> >do a lot of graphics.
> >
> >However, first see whether you are even using all of the the RAM you
> >currently have. Startup a few application, whatever is "normal" for you.
> >Then, do a a single CTRL-ALT_DEL to invoke the XP task manager. Click
the
> >perfomrance tab and see the RAM usage.
> >
> >If you are using nearly all the RAM, and most of the pagefile, then some
> >additional memory (RAM or pagefile) is obviously needed.
> >
> >As for where the pagefile is located, the best place is on a different
hard
> >drive than XP is located, ideally on your fastest/newest hard drive. If
> >that is not practical, then on a different partition.
>
> That is not correct. There are specific circumstances in Windows XP,
> such as the system failure memory dumps, which *require* the presence
> of a paging file on the boot drive.
>
> >I have never heard that two page files is better than one page file of
the
> >same (summed) size.
> >
>
> You have now. See the article by the late Alex Nichol MVP at
> http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
>
>
> Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
> --
> Microsoft MVP
> On-Line Help Computer Service
> http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
>
> "In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP"

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

Sadly yes. I also learnt a lot from Alex.

--


Regards.

Gerry

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FCA

Stourport, Worcs, England
Enquire, plan and execute.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


"Modem Ani" <notquinoas@notmyrealbox.com> wrote in message
newsopnj2XJFHA.2980@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> "...the late Alex Nichol MVP"?
>
> Say it isn't so! I never met the man, but he taught me a great deal
> about
> computing. Is he really gone?
>
> Modem Ani
>
> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u7iv21l053ko9dumo34edivfugckv06q1m@4ax.com...
>> "Bob Harris" <rharris270[SPAM]@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >If you are looking for a significant increase in performance, get
>> >more
> real
>> >RAM. XP responds very well to more RAM, at least up to 512 Meg,
>> >more if
> you
>> >do a lot of graphics.
>> >
>> >However, first see whether you are even using all of the the RAM you
>> >currently have. Startup a few application, whatever is "normal" for
>> >you.
>> >Then, do a a single CTRL-ALT_DEL to invoke the XP task manager.
>> >Click
> the
>> >perfomrance tab and see the RAM usage.
>> >
>> >If you are using nearly all the RAM, and most of the pagefile, then
>> >some
>> >additional memory (RAM or pagefile) is obviously needed.
>> >
>> >As for where the pagefile is located, the best place is on a
>> >different
> hard
>> >drive than XP is located, ideally on your fastest/newest hard drive.
>> >If
>> >that is not practical, then on a different partition.
>>
>> That is not correct. There are specific circumstances in Windows
>> XP,
>> such as the system failure memory dumps, which *require* the presence
>> of a paging file on the boot drive.
>>
>> >I have never heard that two page files is better than one page file
>> >of
> the
>> >same (summed) size.
>> >
>>
>> You have now. See the article by the late Alex Nichol MVP at
>> http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
>>
>>
>> Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
>> --
>> Microsoft MVP
>> On-Line Help Computer Service
>> http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
>>
>> "In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP"
>
>