Swapfile question

[Beginning]

Ok.... I have XP Pro installed and to date I always use a small partition @ the start of my slave drive for a set pagefile. about 3.5 gigs. I wonder if I dual boot Windows 7 and XP will I be able to use the same pagefile for Windows 7? Seeing as both Windows 7 and XP uses a pagefile, but they aren't running @ the same time?

 

[johngalt]

You might encounter problems as W7 has enhanced file and folder and drive security, and if you create a pagefile under one OS and try to access it from another the security parameters, permissions ,etc will be off.

However, You may *seem* to use the same one - as each OS that you boot into may over write the other one.

This is going to be tricky, to be sure....

 

[Beginning]

Well I thought Windows created an up to date pagefile each time it started up? Which led to think maybe it could be used by any Windows OS. Hmmm... I wonder if I should attempt this path anyway..

 

[davehc]

Do you have any reason to keep the pagefile after use?
It can be yet another security leak, as it stores cookies etc as you work.
One way out of your dilemma, could be to clear the pagefile everytime you have finished. It adds a small amount to your switch off time, but nothing serious.
If that solution interests you, do this

Start Regedit. Navigate to

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management
Select ClearPageFileAtShutdown from the list on the right.
Right on it and select Modify.
Change the value to 1 to enable.
Reboot your computer.

 

[smarteyeball]

If it doesn't work well, then you'll know

Although it's probably not the best idea

 

[johngalt]

If you use Dave's method to remove the pagefile then you're in effect making a new pagefile every time you boot - and thus removing it every time you shutdown / restart. This will have a bit of a performance impact, but the main thing is that you will still not be using the *same* pagefile.sys file.

 

[Romulinx2]

Ok.... I have XP Pro installed and to date I always use a small partition @ the start of my slave drive for a set pagefile. about 3.5 gigs. I wonder if I dual boot Windows 7 and XP will I be able to use the same pagefile for Windows 7? Seeing as both Windows 7 and XP uses a pagefile, but they aren't running @ the same time?

You can have your page/swap file on another drive/partition without problems.

 

[Beginning]

@davehc - No I don't do anything with it, I'm also a linux fan and almost every linux version out there uses a seperate small partition for the swapfile. I'm quite positive thats why most linux distro's are so quick. I'd like to give Windows 7 a partition for the swapfile also.. I just thought it may be able to use the same one.

@smarteyeball - Hehehe... although it's not rocket science to reinstall everything now is it? It's just time consuming...

 

[Beginning]

@ RomulinX2 - I've been doing it for years.... But now it sounds like davehc is saying it's a security risk? No don't tell me this now......

 

[johngalt]

Not removing the swap file on your system *can* be a security risk.

It is not *definitely* a security risk, it is also dependent upon a variety of factors, including but not limited to:

what sort of info you actually store on your machine (usernames and PWs for sites, banking info, etc) as well as browser cache settings, etc.

In addition, it is a risk only if someone gets a hold of the file / drive and is able to extract data from it.

Then again it is only a risk if they can actually make out the data that is extracted.

A variety of factors. The bottom line, though, is that *sharing* swap *files* is not a good idea.

Sharing the space is fine - but the files themselves? Bad bad idea.

Also, *nix is not faster only* because of the small swap file at the beginning of the system, although this helps a bit. Other factors that help out in the speed factor are *much much smaller kernel code (on a P4 I was compiling kernel code in less than 45 minutes - I am pretty *positive* that compiling XP's kernel alone back then would have taken much much longer) and thus smaller apps as well - even a full blown GUI is not nearly as large as the Windows system -0 last I checked The latest KDE can be obtained on *CD ROM - but both W7 *and* Vista came on DVDs. Now, I know you'll say that those are OSs and that there are plenty of *nix distributions on DVD - and I'll turn right back around and say that those DVDs have a *lot* more installed with them than an OOB Windows install has with it.

If your system OSs are not all that mission critically important, have a go at it and see what happens - at worst you'll need to reinstall again, at best it *might* actually work simply because this is a Beta and W7 is going to be looking for multi-boot situations to deal with.

 

[Beginning]

Oh alright... I won't try it, Not that crashing both installs worries me, but reinstalling the whole 9 yards over again is no picnic.. But hey the topic seemed to be an interesting idea at the moment.. Thanks for the input there johngalt everyone else..

 

[johngalt]

I admit some curiosity as to whether this could be readily accomplished....

Then again, with the power of today's machines, the need to dual boot seems to be decreasing as more and more people learn about virtualization....

 

[smarteyeball]

@smarteyeball - Hehehe... although it's not rocket science to reinstall everything now is it? It's just time consuming...

Never said it was As for time consuming.... that tends to get tedious after awhile

 

[Patrick C]

I admit some curiosity as to whether this could be readily accomplished....

Then again, with the power of today's machines, the need to dual boot seems to be decreasing as more and more people learn about virtualization....

johngalt - I have a question here I have 64bit Vista & 64bit Windows 7 on the same HD. C:-Vista 105G; D:My Documents 40G; E:Windows 7. I can change the swap file on the Vista to a Min & Max of 7500. Windows 7 will only allow a system managed if 4137Min and recommended of 5457 (Not sure how the system sets that - Question 1)? The WEI for Vista is Processor-4.9; Memory Ram-5.9; Graphics-4.1; Gaming Graphics-3.8; Primary Harddisk-5.3==>Overall 3.8 AND for Windows 7 4.9, 5.9, 3.9, 5.3. 2.9==>Overall 2.9 --Notice the difference in the hard drive number on the SAME Harddrive? Question 2 and finally notice the difference in Gaming Graphics in Vista where ATI Catalyst Manager finsihed the install --3.8 and Vista where it wouldn't install--5.3? Question 3? - God's Speed with this one --Patrick C

 

[Bare Foot Kid]

Hello Patrick C.


In regards to your WEI: MS has revised the WEI ratings and they have been upgraded to reflect newer hardware that is/will be coming into use, hence the differences in the ratings.


Swap file: In XP days some performance gains could be realized by changing the swap file to a smaller footprint; but the way things are today it's better to allow Windows to manage the swap file; few if any gains will be achieved by limiting its size. In actuality, some are convinced that not allowing Windows to manage the swap file will limit some functions of the OS.

I hope this has answered some of your questions.








Later Ted

 

[Patrick C]

Hello Patrick C.


In regards to your WEI: MS has revised the WEI ratings and they have been upgraded to reflect newer hardware that is/will be coming into use, hence the differences in the ratings.


Swap file: In XP days some performance gains could be realized by changing the swap file to a smaller footprint; but the way things are today it's better to allow Windows to manage the swap file; few if any gains will be achieved by limiting its size. In actuality, some are convinced that not allowing Windows to manage the swap file will limit some functions of the OS.

I hope this has answered some of your questions.








Later Ted

Bare Foot Kid - I have been restructing My System for the last 3 - 4 days. I want to set up conditions where I have a Partition of the same size for both Vista Ultimate 64-bit & Windows 7 64-bit. I have each now on 100G partitions with 32.9 G for My Documents. I had to use a DiskManager to Partition the drives as the Windows Vista Disk Manager wouldn't let me divide up the drives as I wanted to. Ques. 1 Do you have any idea why? Next I have a HP and I restored the Hard drive using the restoration DVD's a person can make when they use a HP Computer. When I restored using the DVD's the Disk Manager & Vista didn't show the right size for the drives? Ques. 2 Any Idea why? Finally I Took a 64-Bit Vista Ultimate Installation DVD - and installed it to the C:, after I told the software to Format the drive before installing the software. I then took the Disk Manager software and partitioned as I wanted it to be. Wallah!!!! Everything is working good. I found out in the process that the 17.1 G ( 250 - 232.9G Size of HD) that cannot be accessed is for the System to hold information not accessible to the user. Ques. 3 And the most pertinent here ---- Windows Vista & Windows 7 make a 4316 MB swap file that the system can expand to 5375M. In Vista I can set both limits to 7500 MB which I was under the impression would be a good idea. In Windows 7 the swap file setting will not change. I have decided to let the System manage both and stop messing with software. I realize this is alot but I was wondering what You thought?? God's Speed and Thank you ahead of time for your posts on this Subject----Patrick C

 

[Bare Foot Kid]

Hello Patrick.

Q1: The Master File Table is probably the reason, I believe it is some time placed in an inconvenient location and only 3rd party partition managers can/will move it.

See This Article

Q2: In the past I have used an HP machine with an OEM installation of Vista; every time I decided to do a "recovery" I re-installed it from the "Recovery Partition" and not from the disks, so I'm no help with this.

If you are referring to the 17.1GB that seems to be "missing" from the 250GB HDD that is in the machine; it doesn't really exist (the 17.1) it's the way the manufacturer calculates the available disk space; so they can list it as a 250GB HDD instead of a 232.9GB HDD; just like my 500GB HDDs are only 465.1GBs each.

Yes just continue to let Vista and W7 manage the swap file; you'll be better off in the long run.

I hope this helps answer some questions!


Later Ted

 

[Patrick C]

Bare Foot Kid - Thanks for the answers. So it isn't odd or the system harddrive controller isn't acting odd, if the first time I fired up the HP Laptop I was able to make partitions and then I had to have a 3rd party disk Manager after that? The system seems to be cookin now! Patrick C