Best size for swap size in Win98SE with 320MB ram.

[slatt01]

I have 320Mb ram at the moment and a swap size of 256Mb.

Is it true that the swap file size should be 2.5 times the physical ram, but that works out at a size of 800Mb!

Does anybody have any comments or should I just reduce the memory down to something more usual.

SiSoft Sandra discribes my memory thus:

PC100-322-622, a 128Mb DIMM

PC100-222-622, a 64Mb DIMM &

Pc100-233-622, another 128MB Dimm.


Anybody know what these numbers mean, other that I have to use a BIOS setting of CAS3. Whould I benefit from removing the Cas3 dimm and setting the BIOS CAS setting to 2.


Any advice gratefully received.

 

[slatt01]

Anybody

 

[SonOfZeuz]

With 320mb ram you do not need a 2.5x swap file. This was true when 32 - 64 mb was standard. Just set a min to 100-160 with no max

 

[slatt01]

Thats what I thought but I would like to have a fixed swap size if possible.

 

[BadThad]

HDD Partition/Swap Recommendation

 

[SonOfZeuz]

Swap-File myth #1: Create a permanent Swap-File 2 1/2 or 3 times the amount of physical memory.

Fact: Virtual memory (Swap-File) is a substitute for physical memory. Common sense tells you the more physical memory you have, the less virtual memory you need. Conversely (all other things being equal) the less physical memory you have the more virtual memory you will need. There is no reasonable "rule of thumb" formula for setting the size of a permanent Swap-File.

Swap-File myth #2: Set the 'min' and 'max' size the same for the Swap-File. This one can cause you grief, it is bad advice!!!

Some seem to think of the Swap-File like an insect trap, if you don't have a lid on it, all of those Ks and Ms of bytes and bits will fly out all over the HD. Not so!!! It may help to think of your Swap-File as a water glass sitting on the table (The level within this container will rise and fall as demands change and it is emptied whenever you shut W9x off), the only time it will overflow is if you try to put more into it than it can hold, (your 'min' size setting) and that is the reason you 'never' want to place a 'max' size for your Swap-File, you want it to overflow if it needs to. (This is an analogy, it will not overflow, the Swap-File will increase in size if need be, possibly using non contiguous HD space until it shrinks to your 'Min' size setting again.)

 

[BadThad]

That's pretty good SonOfZeuz but there is one fact you're missing. A non-permanent, non-contiguous swap file (dynamic swap) is a huge cause of drive fragmentation. It cannot be defragmented effectively (as a matter of fact, it cannot be defragmented). In the real world, fragmentation is one of the biggest performance killers. With the large sizes of hard drives today, it is hardly wasteful to create one large contiguous swap file that will ALWAYS meet the needs of the system. This also save CPU resouces (minimal) because windows doens't have to allocate them for the dynamic creation of the swap file.

Keep the opinions coming though, that is the heart of this forum...and Welcome to AT forums!

 

[Mday]

i've been working with a 1 GB swap file for a while ;-)

 

[SonOfZeuz]

You make a good point Badthad, Though i have found (on my system) that the swap file is hardly used, I have 192 mb Ram and i find that a swap file min larger than say 160mb would be a waste of space. I have a min size of 160 and a max of 1000. I can say it never goes over 160.
I use Norton SpeedDisk to defrag, it has an option to optimize(defrag) the swap file and always places it at the begining of the disk.
I still believe it is a bad idea to set min/max the same size but like you say, if your min/max is large enough it will not matter. a max size of 160 would surly cause problems.
P.S. Sorry if it sounds like i'm rambling, tired as hell and going to bed after this post.
GoodNight