![]() |
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
| Welcome to Windows Vista Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find solutions with any problems, errors or issues you are experiencing with Windows Vista. The Vista forum also covers news and updates and has an extensive Windows Vista tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks. |
| |||||||
![]() |
| |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| | Patitioning & Vitual Memmory Dear Powers that Be at Microsoft, A "day and night tweak" that if were possible from OEM's or straight out of the box for Vista should be partitionioning with at least 2 or 3 partitions w/ at least 1partition near the center of the drive. Then placement of the virtual memory in that center partitioning. This is basic performance tweaking 101, but probably far beyond the average computer user expertise. That's why I'm making the suggestion to Microsoft and any OEM's out there. This should be the default setup instead of just having a C drive and D recovery drive. I had multiple partitions on my old Systemax XP w/ said VM moved to center drive and just did the same thing w/ my new HP Pavilion and the diference is spectacular! Awsome sound and video improvement. My point is, is that VM doesn't coexist very well on the same partiton as any OS. And if you were to have OS setup automatically this way or add it to a fixpack in the future, you could probably run circles around those other guys! I'm mean you've already got partitoning and the ability to move the VM built into the OS. ---------------- This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then click "I Agree" in the message pane. http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #2 (permalink) |
| | RE: Patitioning & Vitual Memmory Just to clarify myself. I'm not talking about mutiboot partitions and multiple operating systems. I'm talking about logical partittions, which are extended partitions of Vista. I knew this post was going to go right over some folks head. One other advantage I forgot to mention is the default startup physical memory useage dropped from 50% to 33%. "Bodidleysquat" wrote: Quote: > Dear Powers that Be at Microsoft, > A "day and night tweak" that if were possible from OEM's or straight out > of the box for Vista should be partitionioning with at least 2 or 3 > partitions w/ at least 1partition near the center of the drive. Then > placement of the virtual memory in that center partitioning. This is basic > performance tweaking 101, but probably far beyond the average computer user > expertise. That's why I'm making the suggestion to Microsoft and any OEM's > out there. This should be the default setup instead of just having a C drive > and D recovery drive. > I had multiple partitions on my old Systemax XP w/ said VM moved to > center drive and just did the same thing w/ my new HP Pavilion and the > diference is spectacular! Awsome sound and video improvement. > My point is, is that VM doesn't coexist very well on the same partiton as > any OS. And if you were to have OS setup automatically this way or add it to > a fixpack in the future, you could probably run circles around those other > guys! I'm mean you've already got partitoning and the ability to move the VM > built into the OS. > > ---------------- > This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the > suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I > Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this > link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then > click "I Agree" in the message pane. > > http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #3 (permalink) |
| | Re: Patitioning & Vitual Memmory The MS stance on where the page file should be is not the same as yours. It has been long accepted that it should be either in the same partition as the OS, or on a second physical hard drive, but never in a second partition on the boot drive. I would imagine that this is why OEMs do not set the computers up as per your suggestion. -- Mike Hall - MVP http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx "Bodidleysquat" <Bodidleysquat@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:56AC331D-B68E-440F-A429-66B261BF49B0@xxxxxx Quote: > Dear Powers that Be at Microsoft, > A "day and night tweak" that if were possible from OEM's or straight out > of the box for Vista should be partitionioning with at least 2 or 3 > partitions w/ at least 1partition near the center of the drive. Then > placement of the virtual memory in that center partitioning. This is basic > performance tweaking 101, but probably far beyond the average computer > user > expertise. That's why I'm making the suggestion to Microsoft and any OEM's > out there. This should be the default setup instead of just having a C > drive > and D recovery drive. > I had multiple partitions on my old Systemax XP w/ said VM moved to > center drive and just did the same thing w/ my new HP Pavilion and the > diference is spectacular! Awsome sound and video improvement. > My point is, is that VM doesn't coexist very well on the same partiton > as > any OS. And if you were to have OS setup automatically this way or add it > to > a fixpack in the future, you could probably run circles around those other > guys! I'm mean you've already got partitoning and the ability to move the > VM > built into the OS. > > ---------------- > This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the > suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I > Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow > this > link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then > click "I Agree" in the message pane. > > http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #4 (permalink) |
| | Re: Patitioning & Vitual Memmory Mike, I got that tip out of an old OS/2 book. Anyway it didn't fail me with OS/2, ME, XP, and now Vista. Anyway, what I'd like to hear, is Microsoft tested this setup and decided it doesn't work or something to that effect. I saw your blog and figured maybe you could verify it yourself? "Mike Hall - MVP" wrote: Quote: > The MS stance on where the page file should be is not the same as yours. It > has been long accepted that it should be either in the same partition as the > OS, or on a second physical hard drive, but never in a second partition on > the boot drive. > > I would imagine that this is why OEMs do not set the computers up as per > your suggestion. > > -- > Mike Hall - MVP > http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx > > > > > "Bodidleysquat" <Bodidleysquat@xxxxxx> wrote in message > news:56AC331D-B68E-440F-A429-66B261BF49B0@xxxxxx Quote: > > Dear Powers that Be at Microsoft, > > A "day and night tweak" that if were possible from OEM's or straight out > > of the box for Vista should be partitionioning with at least 2 or 3 > > partitions w/ at least 1partition near the center of the drive. Then > > placement of the virtual memory in that center partitioning. This is basic > > performance tweaking 101, but probably far beyond the average computer > > user > > expertise. That's why I'm making the suggestion to Microsoft and any OEM's > > out there. This should be the default setup instead of just having a C > > drive > > and D recovery drive. > > I had multiple partitions on my old Systemax XP w/ said VM moved to > > center drive and just did the same thing w/ my new HP Pavilion and the > > diference is spectacular! Awsome sound and video improvement. > > My point is, is that VM doesn't coexist very well on the same partiton > > as > > any OS. And if you were to have OS setup automatically this way or add it > > to > > a fixpack in the future, you could probably run circles around those other > > guys! I'm mean you've already got partitoning and the ability to move the > > VM > > built into the OS. > > > > ---------------- > > This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the > > suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I > > Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow > > this > > link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then > > click "I Agree" in the message pane. > > > > http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general > |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #5 (permalink) |
| | Re: Patitioning & Vitual Memmory "Bodidleysquat" <Bodidleysquat@xxxxxx> wrote... Quote: > of the box for Vista should be partitionioning with at least 2 or 3 > partitions w/ at least 1partition near the center of the drive. Then > placement of the virtual memory in that center partitioning. This is basic > performance tweaking 101, but probably far beyond the average computer > user > expertise. That's why I'm making the suggestion to Microsoft and any OEM's when you hit a blue screen. If the page file is located on another volume (whether separate spindle, or partition on same drive) then no dump can be created. A dump is very useful for post mortem analysis. It wouldn't be possible to do crash dump analysis, if you don't have a page file on the system drive. Vista uses very sophisticated virtual memory algorithms, and many machines theses days have plenty of physical RAM anyway (1G, 2G are common). So optimising the page file by placing it on a separate spindle is not likely to be a priority for most users. -- Andrew McLaren amclar (at) optusnet dot com dot au |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #6 (permalink) |
| | Re: Patitioning & Vitual Memmory What you are doing is making the assumption that if the page file resides in the middle of the disk, the heads will not have to move so far and seek times will be reduced. The above assumes that your working area is on both sides of the page file, but in practice this would not be so. Most of the action will be within the C partition. In effect, you are making the hard drive work more than it otherwise would, because the drive heads now have to move to the middle of the drive to access the page file. This is very different to where there is a page file on a separate hard drive where only the page file and data is stored. In this instance, C will be able to work at maximum speed, and the page file access will be made by different heads with essentially nothing else to do other than maybe retrieve the occasional file from the data store. The likelihood is that the heads will stay over the page file area 99% of the time, thereby reducing seek times dramatically for both drives. For more on the page file and VM, read this article written the the late (and great) Alex Nichol.. http://www.aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.php -- Mike Hall - MVP http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx "Bodidleysquat" <Bodidleysquat@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:92057224-1010-4EC5-A8E3-F42A334EF080@xxxxxx Quote: > Mike, I got that tip out of an old OS/2 book. Anyway it didn't fail me > with > OS/2, ME, XP, and now Vista. Anyway, what I'd like to hear, is Microsoft > tested this setup and decided it doesn't work or something to that effect. > I > saw your blog and figured maybe you could verify it yourself? > > "Mike Hall - MVP" wrote: > Quote: >> The MS stance on where the page file should be is not the same as yours. >> It >> has been long accepted that it should be either in the same partition as >> the >> OS, or on a second physical hard drive, but never in a second partition >> on >> the boot drive. >> >> I would imagine that this is why OEMs do not set the computers up as per >> your suggestion. >> >> -- >> Mike Hall - MVP >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx >> >> >> >> >> "Bodidleysquat" <Bodidleysquat@xxxxxx> wrote in >> message >> news:56AC331D-B68E-440F-A429-66B261BF49B0@xxxxxx Quote: >> > Dear Powers that Be at Microsoft, >> > A "day and night tweak" that if were possible from OEM's or straight >> > out >> > of the box for Vista should be partitionioning with at least 2 or 3 >> > partitions w/ at least 1partition near the center of the drive. Then >> > placement of the virtual memory in that center partitioning. This is >> > basic >> > performance tweaking 101, but probably far beyond the average computer >> > user >> > expertise. That's why I'm making the suggestion to Microsoft and any >> > OEM's >> > out there. This should be the default setup instead of just having a C >> > drive >> > and D recovery drive. >> > I had multiple partitions on my old Systemax XP w/ said VM moved to >> > center drive and just did the same thing w/ my new HP Pavilion and the >> > diference is spectacular! Awsome sound and video improvement. >> > My point is, is that VM doesn't coexist very well on the same >> > partiton >> > as >> > any OS. And if you were to have OS setup automatically this way or add >> > it >> > to >> > a fixpack in the future, you could probably run circles around those >> > other >> > guys! I'm mean you've already got partitoning and the ability to move >> > the >> > VM >> > built into the OS. >> > >> > ---------------- >> > This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the >> > suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the >> > "I >> > Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow >> > this >> > link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and >> > then >> > click "I Agree" in the message pane. >> > >> > http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general >> |
My System Specs![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Blue Screen Physical Memmory Dump ;_; | General Discussion | |||
| Clipboard Vitual PC 2007 Can't paste | Virtual PC | |||
| Vitual Network Manager | Virtual Server | |||
| Vitual Server 2005 R2 Installation | Virtual Server | |||
| video card memmory shareing | Vista hardware & devices | |||