Hi When i play some of my pc games my comp (xp home) just sometimes cuts out ( very annoying if you've not saved ). it then gives the message "windows virtual memory to low. windows is increasing it now." the comp has givin me this message about a million times and i think the virtual memory should have been increased enough by now. if anyone can help.......? by the way. i have xp home. 2.6 GHz . 256 MB of RAM thanx
1. Control Panel 2. System Properties 3. Advanced 4. Performance Settings 5. Advanced 6. Change 7. Select custom size and set it to like Min(768) and Max(768) and click OK. 8. Reboot to save the settings.... if this isnt sufficient, make it a bigger number. If you get more memory you will not run into this problem as often _X_X_X_X_X_[small]ASUS A7N8X-X, XP2500+ OC'd to XP3200+ Samsung 1024MB, PC2700 OC'd to PC3200 480GB [3x160GB, 7200, 8MB] EVGA, GeForce4 Ti4600 128MB Rules and Policies: http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487[/small]
Usually Virtual Memory is set to 1 1/2 times your physical memory. The best solution as others have said is to get more memory - paging to disk is a lot slower than reading from physical memory. A couple things to check when you get the message. Go to the Task Manager and on the Processes tab see what is using the most memory in the Mem Usage column. It will also show you the current memory usage at the bottom. The other thing to look for is a memory leak. This occurs when you quit a program but it does not free up all of the memory that it used. Over time this uses up all the available memory since the memory is marked as used so new new programs can't use those parts. Most compliers have tools to check for memory leaks when the program is written but they aren't always used. Microsoft has a webcast showing how to detect memory leaks at http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=/servicedesks/webcasts/so_projects/so2/soblurb2.asp
Old-school ratios eh? Im pretty sure that rule doesnt apply in the mroe recent systems packing 512MB or more of RAM. At the 512MB point I find 512MB pagefile is more than sufficient -- it forces windows to use the memory as much as it can ... of course you may want to ramp that to 768MB if u are trying to play UT2004 since that will crap out your memory really fast. When you get to the 1GB marker, you prolly only need 384MB of pagefile but play around and get a feel for how much you need ... (i tried playing UT2004 with 0MB pagefile but it kept crapping out on me so i set it to 384MB and im fine)
I agree. I don't like having too big a pagefile because Windows is lazy enough as it is. A couple of years ago, when I had to administer an old Netfinity server (PII 400 / NT 4), I added 1GB of RAM to the 192MB that was already in it and got rid of the page file entirely. Even though it never used more than about 500MB of memory, at least once a week I got a message from Windows that the pagefile was too small and would be increased. Of course there was no pagefile so there was no increase, but with over 600MB of memory free while running very memory intensive apps (a couple of databases) there's no reason to complain about being low. Personally, I'd recommend starting out with a 1:1 RAM to pagefile ratio for most users, with a minimum amount of 512MB unless you have 1GB RAM or more. If you run memory intensive applications that probably won't be enough, but I'd rather spend time tweaking settings until Windows doesn't complain than give it any more pagefile than necessary. _X_X_X_X_X_[small]Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a night. Set him on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life Backup A DVD With DVD Rebuilder & CCE Basic: http://www.afterdawn.com/guides/archive/dvd_rebuilder_tutorial.cfm[/small]
No, not old school. Even on modern systems the pagefile is recommeded to be 1 1/2 times physical memory. From the Windows 2003 Server docs: The recommended size is equivalent to 1.5 times the amount of RAM. You should leave the paging file at its recommended size, although you might increase its size if you routinely use programs that require a lot of memory. http://www.microsoft.com/resources/...s/sysdm_advancd_perform_change_vmpagefile.asp Some of the servers I run still do some paging with 3 gigs of ram when they are being hit heavily.
Well according to the docs from Windows NT Terminal Server Edition, if you want to access your terminal server from the internet you should put it outside your firewall. That doesn't make it true. Microsoft is also trying to make it so you can follow their guidelines without running into problems. The only problem is that they have no idea what apps you'll be running, so their guidelines are, by definition, for a machine with a very high load. Besides that, the document you're referring to is for a server OS, which means you can expect a lot of applications and background processes that won't be running on a workstation. Personally I do a lot of MPEG-2 encoding, which is very memory intensive, and I often run Outlook and Firefox (both take a lot of memory) and usually a couple of other programs while I encode. I have a P4 2.4GHz with 768MB RAM and a 768MB pagefile, and I have no problems. Nobody said that you can't use that big of a pagefile, but that doesn't mean most people will.
Yes I am aware of that however Nicstead is running WXP Home and playing games -- not running servers I agree however that in a more 'critical' performance environment then the pagefile is absolutely necessary and I am an adovocate for that 1.5-2 'rule' I just dont think (correctly or otherwise) that it applies so much to modern consumer desktops anymore, at least not in the era of 512MB+ computers Of course since Nickstead is running 256MB of physical memory I reccommended the jump from what would have been 384 to 768 because, games like UT2004 will chew out silly amount of mem and pagefile and it isnt too detrimental to have too much (I tried 1.5GB of RAM with UT2004 and occasionally still had the "ran out memory" error with 0 pagefile ... with 2GB i was ok almost all of the time)
One very important point for people that have ""Low Memory / Out of Memory "" flags popping up! -- It is good practice to create your pagefile on a partition of its own or even better to duplicate it on a second HD if you have one. The 1.5 rule is a formula for general use by average users. Windows XP has an excellent tool to give you an inclination where to start as a pagefile. Right click your toolbar --> select Task Manager --> Performance Tab. Check your Physical Memory ( It should confirm your installed RAM value) Bottom Left read the Commit Charge ~~ Peak will give you the max pagefile requested on your PC since your last O/S installation. Did you exceed your allocation ?? Most people did not. If you did. let's set it higher by all means. Richt click My Computer --> Properties --> Advanced Tab --> Performance section -->Settings --> Advanced Tab --> Virtual Memory section --> Change. FOR each drive you should have; ½ of 1.5 times your physical ram as Min and Max is proper. Do Not forget to click SET for each drive. Windows VVM(VirtualMemoryManager)has an algorithm that will select the quickest path to do the memory swapping;it will use the quickest drive ;then extent to the second allocation without splashing any overload loosely on the drive. One important step in pagefile maintenance that is often forgotten, is the defragmentation. -- The Defragmenter option cannot access the pagefile -- it has to be done prior to the O/S activation at boot-up. An excellent tool to do this is available as freeware from :- http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/freeware/pagedefrag.shtml Be patient when you use it for the first time , you will be faced with a BLUE Screen at BootUp for the length of time it takes to defragment your pagefile. This can be anything from 2 min to 15 min depending on the fragmentation and the size. ~~ Do not forget to disable after use. There is no need to defrag each time you boot up!. -- Thought I would add to this thread my grain of savvy ! Best to A/all. _X_X_X_X_X_[small]Do It Right , and you will be a Happy Camper ! Take Care.[/small]
Thanks Jeanc1, that's a useful little program. Yes Windows always wants a pagefile no matter how much memory you have... We used to fuss over pagefiles in the nineties but I pretty much leave them on auto these days. Say, do you mean put a 1.5x pagefile on every drive? Confirm this before I give it a try... I'm gonna run PageDefrag now. Nicstead are you sorted out? L8R
The answer is yes.. --- ! As you well aware , some programs do reserve a lot of virtual memory; games like UT2004 will reserve a large block of your pagefile.sys and unfortunately may not release it after they are done.That is when the VVM will have no choice but to splash the extra demand for allocation outside the pagefile on your drive. In creating an extra pagefile on your second drive , preferably a split of the needed space on each drive, you are adding a buffer where the VMM will route the request to both spaces simultaneously if needed. A quote from Microsoft Engineering as follows : ""Split the page file over two or more physical drives. If you have two or more physical drives (not just two or more partitions on a single physical drive), splitting the page file over each drive can improve performance because it means Windows XP can extract data from each drive's page file simultaneously. For example, if your current initial page file size is 384 MB, then you'd set up a page file on drive with a 192-MB initial size, and another page file on a second drive with a 192-MB initial size."" and by the way .. here's another excellent FREEWARE tool you may procure at : http://www.dougknox.com/xp/utils/xp_pagefilemon.htm -- this will give you a true recording of what your pagefile.sys has absorbed over a period of time. -- After you have ran your routine programs for a few weeks .. take a peek there and see if you should increase or decrease your pagefile allocation. Time being at a premium in my day to day work , i regret i cannot put those very basic maintenance/ upkeep tips in a more presentable format -- ! I may one day make a GUIDE for the community here at Afterdawn. _X_X_X_X_X_[small]Do It Right , and you will be a Happy Camper ! Take Care.[/small]
If you're adding a pagefile on a second drive, it's also a good idea to make it a drive on a different IDE controller than your OS. Otherwise the speed increase won't be as great since devices on the same cable have to take turns transferring. Unfortunately both of my hard drives are on the same channel due to limitations of the case, but I keep my entire pagefile on it's own partition of my non-OS hard drive. I don't defrag it because I set Windows to clear it whenever I restart the computer. Unfortunately that means rebooting whenever I think pagefile fragmentation is causing slowdown, but I've found it to be faster than defragging so I don't complain (much). To clear your pagefile automatically every time Windows XP reboots, you can use these instructions: http://www.winguides.com/registry/display.php/244/
vurbal --- stands to reason that when i said ""simultaneously"" it had to be on a different IDE Host Adapter. ! ::smiles:: ! By the way .. for your information. --> it is not a controller. Each drive itself has a controller .. the connection to a motherboard is a IDE Host Adapter where you plug in the controller built in each drive. {{ That's the reason a hard disk is called Integrated Drive Electronics in the first place! }}
Well since most people I know call it a controller that's the term I use for easy reference. And if you really want to pick nits, IDE isn't the type of drive, it's ATA. BTW, the reason I mentioned that you should use a different controller is that while it may be obvious to you that you meant a different channel, and obvious to me that it would require one to get the effect you mention, a lot of people wouldn't assume the distinction. Nothing personal but I don't need lessons in hard drive interfaces. I've taught enough A+ classes to have a good understanding _X_X_X_X_X_[small]Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a night. Set him on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life Backup A DVD With DVD Rebuilder & CCE Basic: http://www.afterdawn.com/guides/archive/dvd_rebuilder_tutorial.cfm[/small]
Vurbal --- did you see the :::smiles::: in my reply to you. !! May i suggest you have a look at this link so you learn what ATA is.. ! http://computer.howstuffworks.com/ide2.htm Be well ! ~~shakes hand~~ and walks away !
As I said, nothing personal. Just responding to your nitpicking with some of my own - smilies included. And I'm perfectly aware of how ATA works and what IDE means. As far as that link goes, it's incorrect in calling the interface IDE. It's ATA which refers to being an interface to Attach to the IBM AT. That's why it's referred to as ATA33, ATA66, and ATA100 and not IDE33, IDE66, and IDE100. While no one does it, you could move the controller back to a card, like the old days, and it would still be the same interface, but if you went back to the old proprietary systems that preceded ATA and left the controller on the drive it wouldn't be. In any case there's no need to let our interesting, but generally useless tangent derail a perfectly good thread.
Well I s'pose Nicstead is OK now, Since you guys are putting a real fine point on the nomenclature, We should call it a controller because you can attach other than IDE to it, right? Good discussion though, useful info for many. Regards
