Paging file

macbook pro mid 2009 model a1286 bootcamp winxphome sp2
4 gb RAM
2 mb initial size
4008 mb current size
2 mb minimum allowed
4185 mb recommended
2790 mb currently allocated
what should i set the virtualmemory / paging file size min/max to?
i read on eldergeek it should be 1.5 times the total physical ram, is this true?
system settings on bootcamp says i have 2.72 physical ram whenin actuality i have 4 gb of ram

As interesting as your worst case Mac Pro is, it is not much help to OP's laptop and more basic question.
Never disable page completely.
Hibernation is not perfect but it does help
Why do you want to change the defaults? Low on space? curiosity (also killed the cat).
You can easily move page file to another SSD or hard drive and Windows 7 - probably confused OP even more.
With XP, yes it was normal to have page be larger, often 2x amount of RAM. It is also now a legacy and near ancient OS.
system settings on bootcamp says i have 2.72 physical ram whenin actuality i have 4 gb of ram
NOW we get to the crux of your post and question I think, which has zero to do with page and hibernation.
It has to do with 32-bit OS and Apple's 32-bit BIOS (EFI but still firmware).
On a PC you might see 3.2GB of RAM in XP, on Mac you would need Windows 7 64-bit to use your 4GB (or more) or even to use more than what you see. Some of your RAM is 'deducted' for graphics support, motherboard, and other components.
The only issue would be if your XP partition is low on free disk space which can happen and cause total ruin.

Similar Messages

Windows no longer boots up, paging file error

I just reinstalled windows on my mac last week because until now I had been running the old beta version of boot camp.
Just a few days ago I started getting blue screens every so often and it happened again (twice to be exact) yesterday, however one of the times it booted up and informed me I might want to change my paging file size. Not quite sure what this was I went and found the paging file option in settings and found it was clicked on a set size...so I figured I'd set it on the option that lets windows decide for me hoping this would fix the blue screen problem.
I shut down my computer later that night and now windows won't get to the desktop.
When I start it up normally it runs the system check (which I cannot skip for some reason) which gets to 84% and then says \windows\Dump3865.tmp is cross-linked on allocation unit 1731772
Above it it mentions there is an invalid size for my page file.
I tried booting it up the in safe mode multiple times and every time it generates a list in dos and stops on windows\system32\Drivers\mup.sys
I really don't want to have to reload windows again. Is there anyway to skip the system check (it says press anykey, but that has never worked for me) or any other way to get my paging files back to the way they were?
Thank you.
Oh I'm running leopard with windows XP professional on a macbook pro (last years model) if that helps in anyway.
Message was edited by: Tommmmm

A. run chkdsk
B. What happens if you boot from XP CD and Repair System
C. system file checker - from command "sfc /scannow"
http://www.informationweek.com/news/windows/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=18530125 1
http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/Windows/en-US/Help/f768809f-ed90-415f-a83f-89b4 2108b3551033.mspx

Paging File in windows for SAP

Dear Experts ,
I am new to SAP R/3 Basis .I am very much in need to set paging file size to
1GBram + 8GB. but i am unable to increase virtual memory beyond 4096 initial and 4096 max.
Please any one let me know the step by step procedures
Thanks in Advance
Venkata

see here
<a href="http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;237740">http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;237740</a>

Essbase 64 bit on Windows 2003 Server: Windows Virtual cache/ Paging File ?

Hi,
the speed of our nightly calculations seems to differ from day to day between 1 and 2 hours
I am wondering, what the correct setting for the windows paging file is ?
We use Windows 2003 64 Bit Server with 16 GB RAM
We run 1 Essbase application with 80 GB pag files with 4 GB Data Cache Setting and 1 GB Indexcache Setting in EAS console - on that server is actually nothing else running in production mode (just a few essbase-test application, usually offline)
what is the recommended setting on the windows level in the windows system properties for memory usage ?
We have:
Memory Usage: Adjust for best performance of "Programs" ;
Virtual Memory/Paging file on C-Drive: Custom Size, initial Size: 10 GB, maximum size 16 GB
when system was handed over from Oracle, we had 4 GB virtual memory - however in essbase manual, you read that the recommended value should be 3-5 times the physicial ram -
for me, the cache-bevahiour is strange anyway: if I watch taskmanager, I see in the middle of our 1 hour calculation the memory usage of Esssvr.exe Service using 7 GB of RAM, then the 16 GB RAM are used up at some point (paging file is 9 GB )- then suddenly nearly all the RAM get's cleared and ESSSVR.exe memory consumption goes down to 0 and from 0 increasing again-
looks to me, as all the cache for essbase get's deleted in the miiddle of the calculation, because RAM used up for paging files ?
Can anybody explain or give a clear directions, what to check ?
our application operates normally (no abnormal termination, no generation of *.xcp files)
(Essbase is installed on the 500 GB D-Drive)

Hi John,
thanks for the helpful link - the long discussion reminded me again, that pure cores and cache is not all, what makes up a good essbase application -
I will test with calcparallel 6 (in comparison to 4) on our 64bit environment - just to see if I can achieve a 10, 20 or 30% improvement...
In addition, I must admit, that 50% of our 1-2 hour calculation is calculated in serial/ not parallel... so I expect an additional 5 to 10 min improvement, not more.
Thank you for now

ESE - Event Log Warning: 906 - A significant portion of the database buffer cache has been written out to the system paging file...

Hello -
We have 3 x EX2010 SP3 RU5 nodes in a cross-site DAG.
Multi-role servers with 18 GB RAM [increased from 16 GB in an attempt to clear this warning without success].
We run nightly backups on both nodes at the Primary Site.
Node 1 backup covers all mailbox databases [active & passive].
Node 2 backup covers the Public Folders database.
The backups for each database are timed so they do not overlap.
During each backup we get several of these event log warnings:
Log Name:      Application
Source:        ESE
Date:          23/04/2014 00:47:22
Event ID:      906
Task Category: Performance
Level:         Warning
Keywords:      Classic
User:          N/A
Computer:      EX1.xxx.com
Description:
Information Store (5012) A significant portion of the database buffer cache has been written out to the system paging file. This may result in severe performance degradation.
See help link for complete details of possible causes.
Resident cache has fallen by 42523 buffers (or 27%) in the last 903 seconds.
Current Total Percent Resident: 26% (110122 of 421303 buffers)
We've rescheduled the backups and the warning message occurences just move with the backup schedules.
We're not aware of perceived end-user performance degradation, overnight backups in this time zone coincide with the business day for mailbox users in SEA.
I raised a call with the Microsoft Enterprise Support folks, they had a look at BPA output and from their diagnostics tool. We have enough RAM and no major issues detected.
They suggested McAfee AV could be the root of our problems, but we have v8.8 with EX2010 exceptions configured.
Backup software is Asigra V12.2 with latest hotfixes.
We're trying to clear up these warnings as they're throwing SCOM alerts and making a mess of availability reporting.
Any suggestions please?
Thanks in advance

Having said all that, a colleague has suggested we just limit the amount of RAM available for the EX2010 DB cache
Then it won't have to start releasing RAM when the backup runs, and won't throw SCOM alerts
This attribute should do it...
msExchESEParamCacheSizeMax
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee832793.aspx
Give me a shout if this is a bad idea
Thanks

Paging file is too small for this operation to complete.

iTunes wont open. When I click on it, all it says is 'Paging file is too small for this operation to complete. Please help =)

Now it says Aplication Error - The aplication failed to initialize properly (0xc000012d)

Customizing Paging File: what is the recommended initial and maximum size?

Hi everyone, and Harm,
Following Harm's response to my question about how to setup disks, Harm said this:
"disk allocation: It is a three stage process, first you define the boot order in the BIOS, then you format the disks inWindows and allocate drive letters, then still in Windows you setup the pagefile. Then the allocation of media cache, preview, project etc. is done in the preferences and project setup of PR."
and I have a question about paging file.
First let me say describe my new machine, it has a 4 disc setup, no RAID, 16GB RAM, with OCZ-Vertex3 for OS & Programs, i.e. i have installed Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit on this disc, and Web Premium CS5 and Acrobat Pro 9. In BIOS, i have made the OCZ (OS) disk, be the priority in the Boot order.
Later, after verifying the system is in working order, i will upgrade to Classic Collection CS5.5, so at this point, i have named my 3 additional disks as such,
WDC WD 2002FAEX-007BA0 - "Media Projects(D)"
WDC WD 1002FAEX-00Y9A0 - "Pagefile, Media Cache (E)"
WDC WD 1002FAEX-00Y9A0 - "Previews, Exports(F)"
So, for now these are simply names, which i have given to the various disks, and now i am changing the paging file, switching it from happening in the OS disk, in order to happen inthe disk which (via Premier, later) will be designated for Media Cache.
So, in Windows Performance Options pane, I went to Advanced tab, & under Virtual memory I hit "change", uncheck Automatically manage paging file size for all drives, select drive E, which is the disk that's to have the paging file happen in it.
And the question, assuming that i am supposed to select Custom size, can you Harm, or/and others, please recommend the Initial and Maximum sizes?
Or, should i select "System managed size"?
Thanks:)

http://lifehacker.com/5426041/understanding-the-windows-pagefile-and-why-you-shouldnt-disa ble-it
Keep in mind Video/Animation applications use more ram now than almost any other type and there are far more memory hungry services running in the background as well. Consider the normal recommendations are for standard applications. HD material changed far more than just the need for 64Bit memory addressing.
Eric
ADK

FF14 paging file usage

After some time of inactivity firefox starts offloading its ram continent to paging file, this results in firefox not responding until it load it's continents back from paging file to ram (usually takes up to a minute). How do I turn off paging file use? (I can't turn off paging file entirely due to other programs).

Firefox can't control that.<br />
It is the Windows Operating System that decides which memory pages to swap to disk t make room for other programs.
If it happens that often then it sounds that you do not have enough memory installed or try to run too many programs simultaneously and Windows runs out of memory.

Paging file error!

we have dev and qal on one server , we are unable to start dev and
qal simultaneously the error I am getting is the paging file. I have
increase the virtual memory but tht doesn't work.
logs
ES initialized.
ERROR => [CreateOsShm] CreateFileMapping(62,83926 KB) failed with
Err=1455
ERROR_COMMITMENT_LIMIT: The paging file is too small for
this operation to complete. [shmnt.c 2174]
ERROR => ShmCreate: Create (62,85940720,1) failed [shmnt.c
506]
the observation I have made is the dev is started and its working fine
the PF usage is 7.17GB when I am starting the qal server its the PF
usage reaches till 11.6GB and dispatcher get stopped. The Limit of the
commit charge is 11632572.
can any one help?

Hi,
Can you provide what is the physical memory and the page file size allocated with OS,DB and SAP versions and is it single stack or dual stack ?
Regards,
Laxman

A significant portion of the database buffer cache has been written out to the system paging file.

Hi,
We seem to get this error through SCOM every couple of weeks. It doesn't correlate with the AV updates, so I'm not sure what's eating up the memory. The server has been patched to the latest roll up and service pack. The mailbox servers
have been provisioned sufficiently with more than enough memory. Currently they just slow down until the databases activate on another mailbox server.
A significant portion of the database buffer cache has been written out to the system paging file.
Any ideas?

I've seen this with properly sized servers with very little Exchange load running. It could be a number of different things. Here are some items to check:
Confirm that the server hardware has the latest BIOS, drivers, firmware, etc
Confirm that the Windows OS is running the recommended hotfixes. Here is an older post that might still apply to you
http://blogs.technet.com/b/dblanch/archive/2012/02/27/a-few-hotfixes-to-consider.aspx
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2699780/en-us
Setup a perfmon to capture data from the server. Look for disk performance, excessive paging, CPU/Processor spikes, and more. Use the PAL tool to collect and analyze the perf data -
http://pal.codeplex.com/
Include looking for other applications or processes that might be consuming system resources (AV, Backup, security, etc)
Be sure that the disk are properly aligned -
http://blogs.technet.com/b/mikelag/archive/2011/02/09/how-fragmentation-on-incorrectly-formatted-ntfs-volumes-affects-exchange.aspx
Check that the network is properly configured for Exchange server. You might be surprise how the network config can cause perf & scom alerts.
Make sure that you did not (improperly) statically set msExchESEParamCacheSizeMax and msExchESEParamCacheSizeMin attributes in Active Directory -
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee832793(v=exchg.141).aspx
Be sure that hyperthreading is NOT enabled -
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd346699(v=exchg.141).aspx#Hyper
Check that there are no hardware issues on the server (RAM, CPU, etc). You might need to run some vendor specific utilities/tools to validate.
Proper paging file configuration should be considered for Exchange servers. You can use the perfmon to see just how much paging is occurring.
These will usually lead you in the right direction. Good Luck!

SCOM reports "A significant portion of the database buffer cache has been written out to the system paging file. This may result in severe performance degradation"

This was discussed here, with no resolution
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/exchange2010/thread/bb073c59-b88f-471b-a209-d7b5d9e5aa28?prof=required
I have the same issue. This is a single-purpose physical mailbox server with 320 users and 72GB of RAM. That should be plenty. I've checked and there are no manual settings for the database cache. There are no other problems with
the server, nothing reported in the logs, except for the aforementioned error (see below).
The server is sluggish. A reboot will clear up the problem temporarily. The only processes using any significant amount of memory are store.exe (using 53GB), regsvc (using 5) and W3 and Monitoringhost.exe using 1 GB each. Does anyone have
any ideas on this?
Warning ESE Event ID 906.
Information Store (1497076) A significant portion of the database buffer cache has been written out to the system paging file. This may result in severe performance degradation. See help link for complete details of possible causes. Resident cache
has fallen by 213107 buffers (or 11%) in the last 207168 seconds. Current Total Percent Resident: 79% (1574197 of 1969409 buffers)

Brian,
We had this event log entry as well which SCOM picked up on, and 10 seconds before it the Forefront Protection 2010 for Exchange updated all of its engines.
We are running Exchange 2010 SP2 RU3 with no file system antivirus (the boxes are restricted and have UAC turned on as mitigations). We are running the servers primarily as Hub Transport servers with 16GB of RAM, but they do have the mailbox role installed
for the sole purpose of serving as our public folder servers.
So we theroized the STORE process was just grabbing a ton of RAM, and occasionally it was told to dump the memory so the other processes could grab some - thus generating the alert. Up until last night we thought nothing of it, but ~25 seconds after the
cache flush to paging file, we got the following alert:
Log Name:      Application
Source:        MSExchangeTransport
Date:          8/2/2012 2:08:14 AM
Event ID:      17012
Task Category: Storage
Level:         Error
Keywords:      Classic
User:          N/A
Computer:      HTS1.company.com
Description:
Transport Mail Database: The database could not allocate memory. Please close some applications to make sure you have enough memory for Exchange Server. The exception is Microsoft.Exchange.Isam.IsamOutOfMemoryException: Out of Memory (-1011)
   at Microsoft.Exchange.Isam.JetInterop.CallW(Int32 errFn)
   at Microsoft.Exchange.Isam.JetInterop.MJetOpenDatabase(MJET_SESID sesid, String file, String connect, MJET_GRBIT grbit, MJET_WRN& wrn)
   at Microsoft.Exchange.Isam.JetInterop.MJetOpenDatabase(MJET_SESID sesid, String file, MJET_GRBIT grbit)
   at Microsoft.Exchange.Isam.JetInterop.MJetOpenDatabase(MJET_SESID sesid, String file)
   at Microsoft.Exchange.Isam.Interop.MJetOpenDatabase(MJET_SESID sesid, String file)
   at Microsoft.Exchange.Transport.Storage.DataConnection..ctor(MJET_INSTANCE instance, DataSource source).
Followed by:
Log Name:      Application
Source:        MSExchangeTransport
Date:          8/2/2012 2:08:15 AM
Event ID:      17106
Task Category: Storage
Level:         Information
Keywords:      Classic
User:          N/A
Computer:      HTS1.company.com
Description:
Transport Mail Database: MSExchangeTransport has detected a critical storage error, updated the registry key (SOFTWARE\Microsoft\ExchangeServer\v14\Transport\QueueDatabase) and as a result, will attempt self-healing after process restart.
Log Name:      Application
Source:        MSExchangeTransport
Date:          8/2/2012 2:13:50 AM
Event ID:      17102
Task Category: Storage
Level:         Warning
Keywords:      Classic
User:          N/A
Computer:      HTS1.company.com
Description:
Transport Mail Database: MSExchangeTransport has detected a critical storage error and has taken an automated recovery action. This recovery action will not be repeated until the target folders are renamed or deleted. Directory path:E:\EXCHSRVR\TransportRoles\Data\Queue
is moved to directory path:E:\EXCHSRVR\TransportRoles\Data\Queue\Queue.old.
So it seems as if the Forefront Protection 2010 for Exchange inadvertently trigger the cache flush which didn't appear to happen quick or thuroughly enough for the transport service to do what it needed to do, so it freaked out and performed the subsequent
actions.
Do you have any ideas on how to prevent this 906 warning, which cascaded into a transport service outage?
Thanks!

Host Agent Service critical - Paging file is too small for this operation to complete

Hi all,
at the moment I have the problem that some of my hosts get in the errorstate critical in VMM 2012 SP1.
The error details in VMM are:
Error (2912)
An internal error has occurred trying to contact the hostname server: : .
WinRM: URL: [http://hostname:5985], Verb: [ENUMERATE], Resource: [http://schemas.microsoft.com/wbem/wsman/1/wmi/root/cimv2/Win32_Service], Filter: [select * from Win32_Service where Name="scvmmagent"]
The paging file is too small for this operation to complete (0x800705AF)
Recommended Action
Check that WS-Management service is installed and running on server hostname. For more information use the command "winrm helpmsg hresult". If hostname is a host/library/update server or a PXE server role then ensure that VMM agent is installed
and running.
On the host i cannot connect to FailoverCluster or Hyper.V Manager. After a restart of the host the Problem is gone and the System is working without any Problems for some days.
The paging file is set to 4GB and the OS is Server 2012.
The hosts have 192GB of RAM.
The configuration of the pagfile didn't change from Windows 2k8R2 to 2012.
I didn't find any Errors in the eventlog. Do you have any idea where to check for that?
Thanks,
Patrick

The hotfix didn't solve the Problem for me either. The WMI crash came again after a couple of weeks.
An additional problem with VDS was detected and the following hotfix was installed:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2884597/en-us
Also a problem with Clusterservice was found, sadly MS is tagging this handle leak as "won't fix".
Nevertheless one WMI Instance is still growing...
We are testing a hotfix that so far looks promising. Its a private hotfix only right now. But the file is listed as KB494704 you may want to ask your support engineer to look into it.

Paging file counter

Hi,
O server we have these page file counters:
\Paging File(\??\C:\pagefile.sys)\% Usage
\Paging File(\??\C:\pagefile.sys)\% Usage Peak
\Paging File(_Total)\% Usage
\Paging File(_Total)\% Usage Peak
But only _Total counter has some values like:
\Paging File(_Total)\% Usage - 29
\Paging File(_Total)\% Usage Peak - 37
Page file is located in C:\pagefile.sys and has manually assigned 4096MB.
My question is why other two counters are 0 and does not have data?
\Paging File(\??\C:\pagefile.sys)\% Usage
\Paging File(\??\C:\pagefile.sys)\% Usage Peak
Thanks.

Hi,
Did your system have the light load?
Or you set the incorrect performance counter? You can refer the following similar thread solution to confirm you performance counter configuration:
The solution in the similar case solution:
win key + r --> perfmon --> add counter --> paging file --> % usage
The case link:
Windows Server 2012 - Page file usage
More information:
How to determine the appropriate page file size for 64-bit versions of Windows
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2860880/en-us
Hope this helps.
We
are trying to better understand customer views on social support experience, so your participation in this
interview project would be greatly appreciated if you have time.
Thanks for helping make community forums a great place.

Server 2012R2 paging file size?

What would the appropriate paging file size be for Windows Server Workgroup 2012 R2 64 bit with 32GB of RAM and a AMD FX6350 6-core, 3.9ghz CPU?

That article is a little dated - meant for 64-bit 2003. Microsoft has made a lot of changes since then.
The first thing you should consider is to leave it alone. As I just stated, Microsoft has been tuning its algorithms for determining the proper size. In many cases, it works just fine at the default, as the operating system will monitor and adjust.
However, it does not always work, or rather it may create a larger page than is really needed. In a system with the appropriate amount of memory, you can get by with a minimal (2-4 GB) page file. The operating system does use the page file for
some of the things it does, so it does not pay to try to eliminate it entirely. But memory is so inexpensive today, that if you find that your system is not performing because it is executing a lot of hard page faults during times of system load, get
a little more memory and add it to your system.
If you expect to have the system crashing a lot, and you want to capture the full memory dump, then you will need a larger page file. However, I've been working with Windows server since its beginning, and only once have I seen someone capture the
full amount of memory on a 64-bit system. Even then, Microsoft had identified the problem with a smaller page file, but the customer insisted on getting all the memory in dump. So we configured the system to capture the full 64 GB of memory and
Microsoft showed the exact same place in the dump which was causing the problem (user code). The majority of the time, the cause of a crash can be determined from mini-dump that is captured in a smaller page file. If it becomes critical, and you
have to have a full dump, it is pretty simple to reconfigure to capture the larger dump by creating a larger page file.
. : | : . : | : . tim

Paging File Recommendations - Looking for Experiences / Opinions

Oracle EE 10.2.0.1
OS: Win 2003 Server x64
RAM: 32GB
Proc: 16x 3.5ghz
I currently have our system set to use a 18GB page (Across multiple hard drives). The server has 33GB of RAM in it so I'm wondering how much of a benefit I could gain by uping the page file.
I've read recommendations from Oracle that the paging file needs to be the same size as the amount of system RAM and I've read that paging for windows needs to be 1.5x the amount of RAM.
Things are running fine at the moment but I'm always looking to improve the system. Just curious about others experiences with the OS page file and how they've set it because sometimes more is not better .
Thank you for your time and Opinions if posted.
SB

b96f5b4b-b63b-4542-9fce-b4877c321af2 wrote:
Typically I use ProcXP to monitor the paging and it is full 50% of the time, do you have another monitoring tool you might suggest? Or is the only advice/experience you can provide whimsical?
It's not whimsical. It's a valid point.
Things are running fine at the moment but I'm always looking to improve the system
You appear to have developed a case of Compulsive Tuning Disorder. Your time would be better spent looking for real, measurable bottlenecks, not changing something just because it doesnt' exactly match some piece of advice that is itself just a 'general rule'. Go get a cup of coffee. Stop by the secretary's desk and flirt. Re-read the Concepts manual.
============================================================================
BTW, it would be really helpful if you would go to your profile and give yourself a recognizable name. It doesn't have to be your real name, just something that looks like a real name. Who says my name is really Ed Stevens? But at least when people see that on a message they have a recognizable identity. Unlike the system generated name of 'ed0f625b-6857-4956-9b66-da280b7cf3a2', which is no better than posting as "Anonymous".
All you ed0f625b-6857-4956-9b66-da280b7cf3a2's look alike . . .
============================================================================

Paging file

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for