5 ms·

I've disabled the page file on all my systems since I had more than 128 MB RAM. Increased performance every time. System has never crashed, individual programs

I've disabled the page file on all my systems since I had more than 128 MB RAM. Increased performance every time. System has never crashed, individual programs rarely do since Windows is pretty good about warning you. A funny thing I noticed on my first XP box (256 mb): whenever I ran out of memory, Winamp got killed. Don't know why, but it was no coincidence - I've reproduced this a hundred times, showing it to friends, etc. there was no memory leak in Winamp - it's memory usage was constant. Maybe the system figured out it had no files open in write mode, so killing it would be harmless. Anyone heard of something like this or have another explanation? Windows killed user processes in reversed alphabetical order?! :) tl;dr; determine peak usage, install twice the memory, DISABLE virtual memory, profit!

codinghorror 14y ago
this is, and has always been, a bad idea per http://serverfault.com/a/23684 http://serverfault.com/a/23684
- keeperofdakeys 14y ago
  Of course this always depends on your use-case. If you have more ram then you use (say double), you would never notice the effect of this behaviour. I have a linux laptop with 8GB of ram, and no swap, since the SSD is rather small. It takes a few days to fill up the ram (with file buffers). The programs I run will never approach the amount of ram I have, so I am fine with no swap.
  - rosstafarian 14y ago
    windows doesn't have "swap" watch those videos i linked for more info on how it works and a few people pasted http://serverfault.com/a/2368 http://serverfault.com/a/2368 which has excellent info. There are many reasons to have a paging file even if you have plenty of ram. If you get a bluescreen it has to use the paging file for the memory dump if you want one, etc.
    - keeperofdakeys 14y ago
      I was trying to highlight that in some cases the user won't notice any benefits associated with page file when they have a large amount of RAM, so it is not really a negative to have it disabled. Personally I have encountered times when Windows, having paged processes, knocks them out of memory when I have plenty free (I know the memory is used for file caches, but I would prefer it to kick this stuff out first). As for mentioning linux, I was using it as an example (albeit only slightly applicable).
    - JBiserkov 14y ago
      >There are many reasons to have a paging file even if you have plenty of ram: 1. If you have a BSOD and you want a memory dump 2. e 3. t 4. c 5. .
      - rosstafarian 14y ago
        Sorry but i didnt feel like going into the specifics of windows memory management when i and others gave you the resources to learn more, so i listed one common case that everyone can appreciate. As per your original post I find that completely dubious saying windows never crashes after you disabled your paging file. Windows generally bsod's because of 3rd party driver's(70% of the time, and yes that's a real statistic). So i find it very hard to believe that it never crashes let alone what your lack of page file has to do with anything. Maybe it was blue screening and you where too busy making winamp crash hundreds of times and posting snarky comments on HN to notice?

codinghorror 14y ago

this is, and has always been, a bad idea per http://serverfault.com/a/23684 http://serverfault.com/a/23684

keeperofdakeys 14y ago
Of course this always depends on your use-case. If you have more ram then you use (say double), you would never notice the effect of this behaviour. I have a linux laptop with 8GB of ram, and no swap, since the SSD is rather small. It takes a few days to fill up the ram (with file buffers). The programs I run will never approach the amount of ram I have, so I am fine with no swap.
- rosstafarian 14y ago
  windows doesn't have "swap" watch those videos i linked for more info on how it works and a few people pasted http://serverfault.com/a/2368 http://serverfault.com/a/2368 which has excellent info. There are many reasons to have a paging file even if you have plenty of ram. If you get a bluescreen it has to use the paging file for the memory dump if you want one, etc.
  - keeperofdakeys 14y ago
    I was trying to highlight that in some cases the user won't notice any benefits associated with page file when they have a large amount of RAM, so it is not really a negative to have it disabled. Personally I have encountered times when Windows, having paged processes, knocks them out of memory when I have plenty free (I know the memory is used for file caches, but I would prefer it to kick this stuff out first). As for mentioning linux, I was using it as an example (albeit only slightly applicable).
  - JBiserkov 14y ago
    >There are many reasons to have a paging file even if you have plenty of ram: 1. If you have a BSOD and you want a memory dump 2. e 3. t 4. c 5. .
    - rosstafarian 14y ago
      Sorry but i didnt feel like going into the specifics of windows memory management when i and others gave you the resources to learn more, so i listed one common case that everyone can appreciate. As per your original post I find that completely dubious saying windows never crashes after you disabled your paging file. Windows generally bsod's because of 3rd party driver's(70% of the time, and yes that's a real statistic). So i find it very hard to believe that it never crashes let alone what your lack of page file has to do with anything. Maybe it was blue screening and you where too busy making winamp crash hundreds of times and posting snarky comments on HN to notice?