Defragging page file?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
K

Kenny

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2001
379
0
18,780
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Read in a magazine that doing this will improve performance. It said to
disable page file and then defrag. Then re-enable it and this will give you
a contiguous unfragmented page file.
Haven't done it yet, would like to hear others opinions on the benefits or
otherwise.

--

Kenny
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Defragmenting A Page File
http://www.theeldergeek.com/defragmenting_a_page_file.htm

PerfectDisk Exclusive Features
http://www.raxco.com/products/perfectdisk2k/

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User

Be Smart! Protect Your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Kenny" wrote:

| Read in a magazine that doing this will improve performance. It said to
| disable page file and then defrag. Then re-enable it and this will give you
| a contiguous unfragmented page file.
| Haven't done it yet, would like to hear others opinions on the benefits or
| otherwise.
|
| --
|
| Kenny
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Hi, Kenny.

That magazine article may have been dealing with Win9x/ME. For WinXP, see
this article by MVP Alex Nichol:
Virtual Memory in Windows XP
http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.php

On my WinXP Pro, I go to System Properties | Advanced | Performance Settings
| Advanced and click Change under Virtual Memory. On the next page, for
each volume I click No paging file and Set. Then I go back to the one
volume where I want the swap file to be and click System managed size, then
Set. Then OK out and reboot. Finally, I look for a Hidden, System,
Read-only file name pagefile.sys in the Root of each volume and delete it -
except for that one that I want to keep. Its time and date will show the
time I just rebooted; all the others will have times/dates in the past. If
I try to delete the wrong one, Windows won't let me.

As shown by those file dates/times, the page file gets recreated each time
you reboot, so defragging it is of only temporary benefit.

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
rc@corridor.net
Microsoft Windows MVP

"Kenny" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:eQWjB6qsEHA.3580@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Read in a magazine that doing this will improve performance. It said to
> disable page file and then defrag. Then re-enable it and this will give
> you
> a contiguous unfragmented page file.
> Haven't done it yet, would like to hear others opinions on the benefits or
> otherwise.
>
> --
>
> Kenny
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:05:35 +0100, Kenny wrote:

> Read in a magazine that doing this will improve performance. It said to
> disable page file and then defrag. Then re-enable it and this will give you
> a contiguous unfragmented page file.
> Haven't done it yet, would like to hear others opinions on the benefits or
> otherwise.

Unless you experience heavy usage of your pagefile in daily operations,
there will be little increase in performance. The difference will not be
noticeable to human perceptions.

If you are determined to do this :
If you have two or more partitions, move the page file over to another
drive. Defrag the drive that it's usually on. Then move it back.

Or, use a third party defrag program that can perform a boot time defrag
(before Windows is loaded and the pagefile is in use). Raxco's Perfect
Disk, Diskeeper from Executive Software and O&O's defrag program - to name
a few.

--
Sharon F
MS-MVP ~ Windows XP Shell/User
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

You can/should do that periodically,actually if you run other hds and have
them set to "let windows manage" in system properties or have them set for
the page file you'll see fragmented files that were unable to be defragged
because thier in/were in use when defragging.The trick is to set the hd with
"no page file" then click set 2X to set,when enabling,a restart will be
prompted
to verify you did this correctly.For details om page file,try search at
microsoft,
type😛aul Mcfedries

"Kenny" wrote:

> Read in a magazine that doing this will improve performance. It said to
> disable page file and then defrag. Then re-enable it and this will give you
> a contiguous unfragmented page file.
> Haven't done it yet, would like to hear others opinions on the benefits or
> otherwise.
>
> --
>
> Kenny
>
>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Hi Sharon,

Why move the page file back? I have mine on a second physical hard drive, in
it's own partition. I use Diskeeper.

--
Curt


"Sharon F" <sharonfDEL@ETEmvps.org> wrote in message
news:uxENeBssEHA.2768@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:05:35 +0100, Kenny wrote:
> If you have two or more partitions, move the page file over to another
> drive. Defrag the drive that it's usually on. Then move it back.

> --
> Sharon F
> MS-MVP ~ Windows XP Shell/User
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

A system can perform faster with the page file on a different spindle than
the system disk. I have seen cautions against using an external drive for
the page file, however. If you are running NTFS, Diskeeper (version 9 is
now out) has a boot time defragger for defragging the page file and the file
table.

For a free page file defragger:
http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/freeware/pagedefrag.shtml

"Curt" <no-no@no-time.com> wrote in message
news:eUa%2376usEHA.3872@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi Sharon,
>
> Why move the page file back? I have mine on a second physical hard drive,
> in it's own partition. I use Diskeeper.
>
> --
> Curt
>
>
> "Sharon F" <sharonfDEL@ETEmvps.org> wrote in message
> news:uxENeBssEHA.2768@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:05:35 +0100, Kenny wrote:
>> If you have two or more partitions, move the page file over to another
>> drive. Defrag the drive that it's usually on. Then move it back.
>
>> --
>> Sharon F
>> MS-MVP ~ Windows XP Shell/User
>
>
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:40:02 -0500, Curt wrote:

> Hi Sharon,
>
> Why move the page file back? I have mine on a second physical hard drive, in
> it's own partition. I use Diskeeper.

I keep mine on a second partition too. Reason I included moving it back to
the main partition? Don't know, other than the directions would return the
system to what it was originally but with a defragmented pagefile.

--
Sharon F
MS-MVP ~ Windows XP Shell/User
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Sharon, with enough memory it ceases to have a lot of effect anyway. I am
running 2GB ram and have not bothered to move the page file. I used to do
it on older hardware and if I had fewer resources.

--
What's another word for synonym?
"Sharon F" <sharonfDEL@ETEmvps.org> wrote in message
news:Ox%23Xa73sEHA.2556@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:40:02 -0500, Curt wrote:
>
>> Hi Sharon,
>>
>> Why move the page file back? I have mine on a second physical hard drive,
>> in
>> it's own partition. I use Diskeeper.
>
> I keep mine on a second partition too. Reason I included moving it back to
> the main partition? Don't know, other than the directions would return the
> system to what it was originally but with a defragmented pagefile.
>
> --
> Sharon F
> MS-MVP ~ Windows XP Shell/User
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Andrew E. wrote:

>You can/should do that periodically,actually if you run other hds and have
> them set to "let windows manage" in system properties or have them set for
> the page file you'll see fragmented files that were unable to be defragged
> because thier in/were in use when defragging.The trick is to set the hd with
> "no page file" then click set 2X to set,when enabling,a restart will be
>prompted
> to verify you did this correctly.For details om page file,try search at
>microsoft,

Provided the initial size of the file is set adequate to cover normal
needs (and on larger size RAM, say 512 MB up) it will almost certainly
be excessive, and you start it up on a disk that is not fragmented, then
it will be in one piece and will stay that way. If the disk has free
space in fragments the inbuilt defrag tool will not consolidate them,
nor will Diskeeper (unless they have changed policy in recent versions)
though Perfect disk will. The file might then be started in at least a
partly fragmented state.

Fragmentation of the file on the whole is over-hyped. On a large modern
RAM it has little actual traffic, and retrieval from it is essentially
random, so fragmentation makes little difference.

See my page www.aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm

--
Alex Nichol MS MVP (Windows Technologies)
Bournemouth, U.K. Alexn@mvps.D8E8L.org (remove the D8 bit)
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Diskeeper 9, like 8, defrags the page file during a boottime defrag run that
is set up manually.

--
What's another word for synonym?

"Alex Nichol" <alexn.mvpdts@ntlworld.delete.com> wrote in message
news:cu65n05huk6a9knevhqk4m2s15ptf1vnkv@4ax.com...
> Andrew E. wrote:
>
>>You can/should do that periodically,actually if you run other hds and have
>> them set to "let windows manage" in system properties or have them set
>> for
>> the page file you'll see fragmented files that were unable to be
>> defragged
>> because thier in/were in use when defragging.The trick is to set the hd
>> with
>> "no page file" then click set 2X to set,when enabling,a restart will be
>>prompted
>> to verify you did this correctly.For details om page file,try search at
>>microsoft,
>
> Provided the initial size of the file is set adequate to cover normal
> needs (and on larger size RAM, say 512 MB up) it will almost certainly
> be excessive, and you start it up on a disk that is not fragmented, then
> it will be in one piece and will stay that way. If the disk has free
> space in fragments the inbuilt defrag tool will not consolidate them,
> nor will Diskeeper (unless they have changed policy in recent versions)
> though Perfect disk will. The file might then be started in at least a
> partly fragmented state.
>
> Fragmentation of the file on the whole is over-hyped. On a large modern
> RAM it has little actual traffic, and retrieval from it is essentially
> random, so fragmentation makes little difference.
>
> See my page www.aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
>
> --
> Alex Nichol MS MVP (Windows Technologies)
> Bournemouth, U.K. Alexn@mvps.D8E8L.org (remove the D8 bit)
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I've removed the page file completely, then ran defrag, then re-created it,
seems to work for me!!!

-Tiaira

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message
news:OK%23g8lKtEHA.2688@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Diskeeper 9, like 8, defrags the page file during a boottime defrag run
> that is set up manually.
>
> --
> What's another word for synonym?
>
> "Alex Nichol" <alexn.mvpdts@ntlworld.delete.com> wrote in message
> news:cu65n05huk6a9knevhqk4m2s15ptf1vnkv@4ax.com...
>> Andrew E. wrote:
>>
>>>You can/should do that periodically,actually if you run other hds and
>>>have
>>> them set to "let windows manage" in system properties or have them set
>>> for
>>> the page file you'll see fragmented files that were unable to be
>>> defragged
>>> because thier in/were in use when defragging.The trick is to set the hd
>>> with
>>> "no page file" then click set 2X to set,when enabling,a restart will be
>>>prompted
>>> to verify you did this correctly.For details om page file,try search at
>>>microsoft,
>>
>> Provided the initial size of the file is set adequate to cover normal
>> needs (and on larger size RAM, say 512 MB up) it will almost certainly
>> be excessive, and you start it up on a disk that is not fragmented, then
>> it will be in one piece and will stay that way. If the disk has free
>> space in fragments the inbuilt defrag tool will not consolidate them,
>> nor will Diskeeper (unless they have changed policy in recent versions)
>> though Perfect disk will. The file might then be started in at least a
>> partly fragmented state.
>>
>> Fragmentation of the file on the whole is over-hyped. On a large modern
>> RAM it has little actual traffic, and retrieval from it is essentially
>> random, so fragmentation makes little difference.
>>
>> See my page www.aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
>>
>> --
>> Alex Nichol MS MVP (Windows Technologies)
>> Bournemouth, U.K. Alexn@mvps.D8E8L.org (remove the D8 bit)
>
>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom