From: John Callaway on
I have XP SP2, 2 Gig on my laptop. My 80 Gig HD is partitioned 32/48
for C & D respectively. I am satisfied with the performance, however I
would like to increase efficiency if practical.
My question is: Would setting up another partition dedicated for
the page file only be worth the effort or do I run the risk of
creating more problems than necessary?

JPC
From: Leonard Grey on
Dedicating a partition to the page file prevents it from being
fragmented, which in turn improves a computer's performance.

On paper.

In the real world, and especially with today's faster hardware, you
won't notice any difference at all. As in: zero.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est

John Callaway wrote:
> I have XP SP2, 2 Gig on my laptop. My 80 Gig HD is partitioned 32/48
> for C & D respectively. I am satisfied with the performance, however I
> would like to increase efficiency if practical.
> My question is: Would setting up another partition dedicated for
> the page file only be worth the effort or do I run the risk of
> creating more problems than necessary?
>
> JPC
From: mikeyhsd on
NO

only real advantage in moving page file would be to the first partition of a second disk, not just to another partition of the same disk.

mikeyhsd(a)hotmail.com



"John Callaway" <jcalla(a)erols.com> wrote in message news:0oj2m59ens8tld183sb14on70rpih548hm(a)4ax.com...
I have XP SP2, 2 Gig on my laptop. My 80 Gig HD is partitioned 32/48
for C & D respectively. I am satisfied with the performance, however I
would like to increase efficiency if practical.
My question is: Would setting up another partition dedicated for
the page file only be worth the effort or do I run the risk of
creating more problems than necessary?

JPC
From: Ken Blake, MVP on
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:53:54 -0500, John Callaway <jcalla(a)erols.com>
wrote:

> I have XP SP2, 2 Gig on my laptop. My 80 Gig HD is partitioned 32/48
> for C & D respectively. I am satisfied with the performance, however I
> would like to increase efficiency if practical.
> My question is: Would setting up another partition dedicated for
> the page file only be worth the effort or do I run the risk of
> creating more problems than necessary?


That's not at all a good idea, but the reason is performance, not
problems. It puts the page file farther from the other data on the
drive, so the drive heads have to travel farther to get to and from
the page file. That will slow you down rather than improve
performance.

However, how much it slows you down depends on how much the page file
is used, and that depends on how much RAM you have. The more RAM, the
less page file use, and for many people these days, the difference in
performance is so slight as to be unnoticeable.


--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
From: John Callaway on
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 08:26:00 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
<kblake(a)this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote:

>On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:53:54 -0500, John Callaway <jcalla(a)erols.com>
>wrote:
>
>> I have XP SP2, 2 Gig on my laptop. My 80 Gig HD is partitioned 32/48
>> for C & D respectively. I am satisfied with the performance, however I
>> would like to increase efficiency if practical.
>> My question is: Would setting up another partition dedicated for
>> the page file only be worth the effort or do I run the risk of
>> creating more problems than necessary?
>
>
>That's not at all a good idea, but the reason is performance, not
>problems. It puts the page file farther from the other data on the
>drive, so the drive heads have to travel farther to get to and from
>the page file. That will slow you down rather than improve
>performance.
>
>However, how much it slows you down depends on how much the page file
>is used, and that depends on how much RAM you have. The more RAM, the
>less page file use, and for many people these days, the difference in
>performance is so slight as to be unnoticeable.

Thanks for all the info! I guess I will well enough alone.

JPC