RE: Guidelines for W2K Pro PageFile Size

[Andrew S. Baker]

The main reason to set the pagefile to a static size is so that you don't incur a performance penalty as it grows.

 

Of course, depending on what you do, you may never even reach the 768MB number, so it might be a moot point.

 

I prefer static.

 

Win2K likes a larger Pagefile, and the default is 1.5x to 3x of RAM.

 

Perfmon is still the best way to figure out what you need...

 

 

 

==============================================================

 ASB - http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/?File=~MoreInfo.TXT

==============================================================

 "Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability
 to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable
 for their apparent disinclination to do so." -- Douglas Adams

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Underwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 3:57 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Guidelines for W2K Pro PageFile Size

I'm looking for guidelines/recommendations for setting the pagefile size on a W2K Pro SP2 machine.

 

My guideline for NT used to be to set both MIN and MAX = (2 * PhysicalRAM) + 16

 

I just bought 512MB SDRAM (only $80!!! for 2 Kingston 256M ECC sticks) , so this works out to be quite a good size pagefile:  1040

 

Interestingly enough, the W2K default setting is 768 - 1536.

 

So, for W2K is it still best to set MIN and MAX to the same value?

Is there a formula that's best to use?

Or is it best to let W2K set it's own values?

 

I know about setting the location of the pagefile:

    -- Only one PF per physical disk

    -- Create separate PFs on separate physical disks

    -- Best on non-RAID or RAID 1

    -- Avoid putting on RAID 5

Best Regards,
JMU

Jim Underwood
Apollo Information Systems, Inc.
Houston, TX 77058

EMail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm