Does the attached picture make sense to anyone? It shows the total ram, available ram, total virtual memory, available virtual memory & pagefile space. Wouldn't the pagefile space be the same as virtual memory and shouldn't it be the same size?
Last edited by drivenbywhat; Jan 31st, 2010 at 12:43 PM.
[vb5 & starting to move to vb2008] I appreciate the help I get from everyone. Thank you.
in my experiences the page file is always the bigger of the 2 as to why im not sure tho :s
you aren't taxing your system if this is the case. Mine is smaller.
I can shed SOME light on this though. Page file space is what is currently being allocated. It doesn't have to match available virtual memory simply because it's dynamically allocated.
As to why your page file available size is smaller than the actual size, i can think of two possibilities. One is that your file is fragmented and that's how much space on the hard drive it's using up because of set cluster sizes, or secondly due to your low ram (1gb), your system may be caching 400mb of SYSTEM files into the page file, such as superfetch data.
You should also compare your numbers on the "performance" tab on the task manager. This listing is more straightforward and divides memory up by how it's used by the system.
And by the way, why hasn't someone written a patch to let your extra unused memory (see my image below) be used by the pagefile? Obviously SOMETHING is capable of using that much ram since the pagefile can be so big!
Last edited by Lord Orwell; Mar 9th, 2009 at 12:16 AM.
This may be a stupid question what is a page file and how does it fit in to the equation of virtual memory?
when you quote a post could you please do it via the "Reply With Quote" button or if it multiple post click the "''+" button then "Reply With Quote" button.
If this thread is finished with please mark it "Resolved" by selecting "Mark thread resolved" from the "Thread tools" drop-down menu. https://get.cryptobrowser.site/30/4111672
the pagefile is the allocated-to-disk part of virtual memory. I really can't come up with a situation where it is bigger than virtual memory, but if it's dynamically allocated, it may simply have not been updated yet.
Drivenbywhat: Did you perhaps resize your virtual memory and not reboot yet? That would explain a discrepency in size.
I wished the forums would update you when your post got a reply each time instead of just once .
No I haven't changed the size and I have restarted the system. Pretty weird. Your guess about it being fragmented might make sense. The performance tab in TM doesn't help either. This will be an interesting mystery.
I take it you have a 32bit OS? Perhaps that's why there is no patch for taking advantage of the rest of that space you have.
Last edited by drivenbywhat; Mar 9th, 2009 at 11:58 PM.
[vb5 & starting to move to vb2008] I appreciate the help I get from everyone. Thank you.
I wished the forums would update you when your post got a reply each time instead of just once .
No I haven't changed the size and I have restarted the system. Pretty weird. Your guess about it being fragmented might make sense. The performance tab in TM doesn't help either. This will be an interesting mystery.
I take it you have a 32bit OS? Perhaps that's why there is no patch for taking advantage of the rest of that space you have.
it's not completely unused. It's just unavailable for user programs. Windows uses some of it. It's not really a big deal. I almost never fill the ram up even when multitasking, and large games with a lot of ram, i run only the game anyway. I was aware of the ram limit and i also own win 64 if necessary, but 4gb is the sweet spot for 32 bit also since the system can use more than 3gb (if not by much) and it's impossible to install 3gb only and still use the dual-channels of my memory controller. Finally, if i was still using onboard video, it was using 256 meg of it.
Last edited by Lord Orwell; Mar 11th, 2009 at 11:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by dark_shadow
. 