immortal virtual memory

In the virtual memory settings, I unchecked "Automatically manage page file
size for all drives", and then selected "No paging file". Even though it
didn't ask me to reboot when I applied the changes, I rebooted anyway, and
now when I check, under "Total paging file size for all drives" it does say
"Currently allocated: 0MB", as expected.
Yet under Windows Task Manager\ Performance, under Kernel Memory (MB) I have
Paged 56, and under System I have Page File 595M/977M.

I have 1GB physical memory, and decided to disable swapping because if (for
example) calculator, notepad, and solitare each require 1GB of memory, I
would rather run them one at a time and have windows complain about lack of
memory if I try to run two at once than run them all at the same time and
have windows constantly thrash my disk. (I share Seymour Cray's attitude
about swap files.)

So under Performance in Windows Task Manager, does "paged kernel memory" not
really mean paged kernel memory, and "page file" not really mean page file,
or is Vista ignoring my virtual memory settings?

Also while on the topic of virtual memory, why does it say under "Total
paging file size for all drives" "Minimum allowed: 16MB"? Does that mean
that Vista has calculated that 1GB of memory isn't sufficient, and it really
requires 1GB + 16MB? Why then does it claim "Currently allocated: 0MB" and
yet still run fine, if the minimum is 16MB?

And how much memory does it really need? If I install 256 petabytes of RAM,
will Vista finally say "Minimum allowed: 0MB" under "Total paging file size
for all drives"?

Hello,

<snip>
> under System I have Page File 595M/977M.

Perhaps the page file still exists, but it is not using it?

> So under Performance in Windows Task Manager, does "paged kernel memory"
> not really mean paged kernel memory, and "page file" not really mean page
> file, or is Vista ignoring my virtual memory settings?

There are 2 types of memory that a program can allocate in kernal mode,
paged memory and non-paged memory. The system still differentiates between
these two types, even if what it considers "paged" memory has no place to be
paged to.

> Also while on the topic of virtual memory, why does it say under "Total
> paging file size for all drives" "Minimum allowed: 16MB"?

I believe this means that if you choose to have a paging file, it must be at
least 16 MB. For example, you could not have an 8 MB paging file, even
though it is OK to not have one at all.


--
- JB

Windows Vista Support Faq
http://www.jimmah.com/vista/

"Jimmy Brush" <> wrote in message
news:73C4ADA4-77F3-43C5-A70B-...
>> under System I have Page File 595M/977M.
> Perhaps the page file still exists, but it is not using it?
If that's the case, then shouldn't it say Page File 0M/977M?
The 977M remains constant during system operation, but the 595M fluctuates
roughly in proportion to physical memory usage. What do the 595M and 977M
refer to?

[explanations of other issues snipped]
Thanks for those.

"Roof Fiddler" wrote:

> I have 1GB physical memory, and decided to disable swapping because if (for
> example) calculator, notepad, and solitare

Hey we are into the 2006 year!! Windows Vista is not Windows 3.1!!!
So there's no valid reasons to disable paging file.

At least in XP it needs at least 2 (or 8?) MB of paged memory to write the
minimal error report if XP crashes. You can run w/o paging file but you have
no way to know what was running when it crashed.
Michael

"Roof Fiddler" <> wrote in message
news:...
> In the virtual memory settings, I unchecked "Automatically manage page
> file size for all drives", and then selected "No paging file". Even though
> it didn't ask me to reboot when I applied the changes, I rebooted anyway,
> and now when I check, under "Total paging file size for all drives" it
> does say "Currently allocated: 0MB", as expected.
> Yet under Windows Task Manager\ Performance, under Kernel Memory (MB) I
> have Paged 56, and under System I have Page File 595M/977M.
>
> I have 1GB physical memory, and decided to disable swapping because if
> (for example) calculator, notepad, and solitare each require 1GB of
> memory, I would rather run them one at a time and have windows complain
> about lack of memory if I try to run two at once than run them all at the
> same time and have windows constantly thrash my disk. (I share Seymour
> Cray's attitude about swap files.)
>
> So under Performance in Windows Task Manager, does "paged kernel memory"
> not really mean paged kernel memory, and "page file" not really mean page
> file, or is Vista ignoring my virtual memory settings?
>
> Also while on the topic of virtual memory, why does it say under "Total
> paging file size for all drives" "Minimum allowed: 16MB"? Does that mean
> that Vista has calculated that 1GB of memory isn't sufficient, and it
> really requires 1GB + 16MB? Why then does it claim "Currently allocated:
> 0MB" and yet still run fine, if the minimum is 16MB?
>
> And how much memory does it really need? If I install 256 petabytes of
> RAM, will Vista finally say "Minimum allowed: 0MB" under "Total paging
> file size for all drives"?
>