About PageFile size and SSD.

The recommended PageFile formula is 1.5x system memory and minimum PageFile size to system memory size + 1MB on Windows 7 64-Bit systems as stated by Microsoft.

A) Is it safe to reduce the PageFile size to just 1GB-2GB with 8GB ram to save space on my SSD drive?

B) Can I have 2GB PageFile on the SDD and the rest of the PageFile on secondary hard drive to account for system memory size + 1MB?


If question A is not achievable without concerns for system stability and OS errors, for question B (if achievable):

C) Would the OS being using only the SSD (1GB-2GB PageFile) for system pages (pages would be much faster on SSD) and then use SSD + secondary hard drive combined PageFile for full system dumps if necessary?

 

A) Yes. I had a 1gb pagefile with 4gb ram, with no problems. Obviously YMMV - it really depends on what you use your laptop for

B) I would just move the whole pagefile to your secondary hard drive - save on the writes to the SSD.

C) Having a pagefile on the SSD will be faster - but i think you have enough RAM for any performance hit to be negligible

 

2GB pagefile with a 4GB RAM and no issues so far...


--

 

I have it on custom size, Initial size is set to 16 MB and Maximum to 4096 MB.
3 GB RAM.

 

I keep my PF at 512MB on the SSD, but I also have 8GB of RAM and Linux VMs don't need more than 2GB of RAM, so I never really have memory issues.

 

512MB for the PF sounds kinda low, I dare not even go down to 1GB and thus why I'm asking.

Seems to be, maybe 2GB might work out for the PF size with 8GB ram if not then I'd make another 6GB on the secondary drive just to make sure the OS runs problem free.

More opinions and experience are welcomed.

 

My choice is based on my usage. I don't game or edit. My desire for 8gb of ram was so I could run one or two guests without paging (Linux runs fine on 2gb or less). For most of my Windows usage, I don't think I even hit more than 2.5 actively used (caching is a different matter). Also, until I get a caddy, my 2nd drive is a 24gb express are sad that holds my docs and whatever av files I'd like to play. I have external drives for archiving. Even my Calibre library is on external media.

Sent from my SGH-i917 using Board Express

 

In regards to writing to the pagefile stored on an SSD, on average, there are not as many writes as you one would think. So if you can spare the space, keep it there.

See the "Should the pagefile be placed on SSDs?" from Support and Q&A for Solid-State Drives - Engineering Windows 7 - Site Home - MSDN Blogs for addt'l info.

 

Yup that's the thing I don't want to have to spare the SSD drive space for 8GB worth of PF. Thus, I was thinking of reducing the PF on the SSD drive to 2GB and making another 6GB on a secondary mechanical drive. Keeping the OS pages and application pages on the SSD PF (2GB).

As far as I know, Windows only really uses up to 1GB of PF for the OS and applications that request for a PF to be present. Having a 8GB PF split between the SSD + HDD which equals the amount of memory I plan on upgrading to is more or less for just for system stability and BSOD memory dumps (if any).

Bringing me back to my original C) question which is, if I split the PF between SSD + HDD (2GB on SSD + 6GB on HDD) would this still account for the 8GB total that and need and would most of paging that is needed for the OS and application request only use the 2GB on the SSD first then HDD (if needed over 2GB then on the HDD too)?

 

The answer to this configuration will vary from user to user. However, I don't believe you can specify how the OS uses the page file for virtualized memory. In other words, I don't think you can configure the pagefile on this disk is for OS use, and the pagefile on that disk is for user apps. I believe it is up to the OS to decide what swapped out memory ends up in the configured pagefiles.

Let me ask this. What other services / apps do you run on your system? For example, I run a web server, database server along side the other normal services/daemons. Do you need to run large CAD or video encoding apps? Do you use multiple, concurrent virtual machines? All these are going to make demands on memory, and may involve swapping memory out to the pagefile. Next ask what are your expectations in performance?

I would say, try it out w/ that division. If it works, and you don't encounter any performance lags (performance monitor can help detect any thrashing), then stick with that layout. If not, determine what apps are causing you to thrash, and "tweak" your settings that better suit your working environment.

Good luck.

 

Nemix77,

The pagefile setting is very specifically tied to the software you're running and your specific usage scenario.

With 8GB RAM, I would disable the pagefile and use the system normally (but in 'test-mode') for a week or so - you'll have your answer quickly if your specific setup can run like this.

Splitting the pagefile between two drives is not a good idea when one is an SSD and the other is an HDD. The reason is that Windows will use the pagefile it deems faster (and this is determined 'on-the-fly', for that particular moment in time) and will almost always default to the SSD. Not that the HDD's pagefile won't be used: just that it will always be the last choice for the O/S.

If you're not editing video/image files (or other memory intensive software) then disabling the pagefile will almost certainly be beneficial and will provide a marked increase in system performance.

Btw, forget about the 'formula' that was developed 3 or 4 Windows versions back when RAM was considered 'huge' at 128MB.

Good luck.

 

I found this old Microsoft support on splitting the PageFile dated 2006:

Link: Optimizing Your Paging File (PAGEFILE.SYS)

Not sure if applies to Windows 7 but after the read seems to me that keeping the PageFile on the SSD with custom values being 1GB minimum and 8GB maximum so the PageFile can grow if needed is the best solution to keep the PageFile as smallest possible on the SSD drive while maintaining the fastest performance possible for the PageFile when needed.

The reason why I'm assuming 1GB minimum for the PF is because I don't think the PF will grow larger than this value even with 8GB system memory unless a memory kernel dump is needed which is now covered with the 8GB maximum value set for the PF on the SSD, however I do not know if the PF will shrink back to minimum values if in the case a full 8GB worth of system kernel dump is needed.

If one is worried about the PF growing to maximum set of 8GB size and not shrinking down in size when not needed on the SSD drive then splitting the PageFile as mentioned in question C) in still a viable solution with a chance of slight PageFile performance decrease is the PF request comes from the secondary mechanical drive which I think it won't with Windows 7 since the set 2GB PF size on the SSD drive should be sufficient for all OS and application PF requests.

 

Nemix77,

Seriously, you need to ignore that old pagefile 'info'.

Even though that link you provide was updated (for whatever reason...) in 2006, the 'advice' is far, far more ancient:

Needless to say, this definitely doesn't apply to Windows 7.

 

@ tilleroftheearth

I'm only concerned about splitting the PageFile in that old Microsoft 'info', I already know that the minimum required PF size for Windows 7 is system ram + 1mb in order for full memory kernel dump if needed.

Which again brings me back to option C), which I think is the best option for most SSD users since this provides the necessary PageFile request from the OS and application directly located on the SDD for faster access/performance and also provides the minimum required PF size for full memory kernel dump.

 

i run mine at 512mb min and 2048 max on a 8Gb physical system and no matter how much i load up the system with multitasking and open apps/processes it never blips so its not using pagefile at all! and i got 8Gb of my precious SSD space back

 

The way I understand it, if you want to be safe and reduce the PageFile size it's probably best to go with the minimum required ram size for the OS, example Windows 7 (32-Bit) requires 1GB min and Windows 7 (64-Bit) requires 2GB min.

This would make sense since the min required ram specs for each type of Windows 7 OS (32/64-Bit) was probably taken into account as the maximum reduction of memory needed for the OS and application before the OS + Apps need a PF request degrading overall system performance.

So in short, my assumption is it's safe to have the PageFile as 1GB static size for Windows 7 (32-Bit) and 2GB static size for Windows 7 (64-Bit) taken into consideration that you'll never needed a full memory kernel dump for diagnostics and troubleshooting.