Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Mon, 24 Jul 2000 23:57:08 +1000 |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edna Sloan" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 3:53 PM
Subject: [PCBUILD] Swap File optimization
> I have read a number of different ideas in different places regarding
> setting up swap files. Someone please straignten me out if the following
is
> in error.
>
> First, here is the way I have set mine up. I am running W98 on a 10G
drive.
> I used PMagic to make a small extended partition (D) for the swap file and
> made it FAT 16 with 32K cluster size. I let W98 handle the file, with min
> of 0 mb and max of ~306mb. I have 64MB of ram, but may add more later.
The
> rest of the drive is the primary partition (C) with FAT 32.
>
> I have heard that one should make the max/min size of the swapfile the
same
> so it won't get fragmented, and in the same partition (C) this would seem
to
> be best. But in it's own exclusive partition, since all it does it
> overwrite itself, it would not become fragmented(?), and would use only
the
> amount of the file it needed, rather than the whole thing each time,
saving
> some time it would seem. Also with the 32k cluster size it should run
> faster than the 4k of FAT32.
>
>
Just my $0.02:
I would set the swap file on its own partition, and use a large fixed size
(min=max) file. The reason to use a fixed size is that windows doesn't need
to locate new space and resize the swap file (which saves time) when
required because the large file size and fixed size/position.
I do see performance increase when a large fixed swap file in use.
Jun Qian
PCBUILD maintains hundreds of useful files for download
visit our download web page at:
http://nospin.com/pc/files.html
|
|
|