several problems with last version

[neyb]

hi,

 

i'm using defraggler 2.07.346 (64bits).

 

threre are 2 (linked?) troubles :

1. my 2 western blue caviat disks are detected as ssd (afaik, i didn't bought 1.5t of ssd ^^). it s build on P8P67 (with AHCI enabled)
   
2. when i defragment at boot time (for pagefile.sys...) my screen just block when defragmenting pagefile (maybe i didn t wait enougth... i just wait around 10 minutes...but it's a 8gb file...). i need to press F8 at boot and run on last configuration that works (a windows fonctionnality)
   

no idea ?

sorry for my english ...if it can't be called so

[eL_PuSHeR]

The issue with wrong SSD detection has been discussed HERE. I think developers are looking into this.

 

About your boot-time issue: I have no idea as I seldom use boot time defrag.

[kroozer]

You can reduce the size of the Paging File so that it defrags faster.

 

Mine is set 32MB - 1GB.

➣ Advanced system settings ➣ Performance-Settings ➣ Advanced ➣ Virtual memory-Change

 

You can also have Windows overwrite the Paging File at shutdown with Fixit 50463.

[neyb]

ok this is solved, was just very slow (file was totally sprinkle).

1gb is fine with 8 gb of ram ?

[Winapp2.ini]

I think the old Windows XP way of doing things was to set your Pagefile to 1/2 of your total RAM, but honestly 8GB of RAM and you don't actually need a pagefile. 1GB is fine.

 

I don't run with a pagefile anymore on my computer, as it has 12GB of RAM.

[neyb]

ok ty !

[TechHarmony]

Just FYI,

In 'olden days' of XP and low amounts of RAM, the recommendation was usually to set Pagefile to 1.0 or 1.5x of your system RAM.

So if you had 512 MB RAM, your pagefile would ideally be 512 + 256 = 768 MB. But that was for older systems.

And this guideline still applies, if you have an older XP system with a limited amount of RAM.

also, having a fixed size (at the larger side of your range) -- and preferably contiguous -- Pagefile definitely helps on such XP limited RAM systems.

 

But one question I have, seeing as I have XP, with 2GB RAM and 2GB Page file,

I thought there were some programs that needed a pagefile, even if you had plenty of RAM. Not so much for performance enhancement, but because program was designed such that it needed some pagefile space. Maybe I am remembering from too far back.

Anyway, because of this, I never set and do not recommend folks to have 0 Pagefile size, at least with standard HDs.

But maybe this does not apply for newest systems with SSD. yes? no?

[Winapp2.ini]

I do not run into problems running without a pagefile. I think programs that only call memory from the page are a thing of the past, or at the very least, incompatible with windows 7 x64

[hazelnut]

If for any reason you need a kernel memory dump on XP for troubleshooting, you won't be able to have one if you don't have a pagefile on the boot volume of between 15MB and 2GB.

 

Mini dumps need a page file of at least 2MB on an XP boot volume.

 

Full memory dumps are not available on computers that are running a 32-bit operating system and that have 2GB or more of RAM.

 

I know the XP options quite well as I'm a beta tester for a couple of software apps.

 

 

EDIT...

 

Found this which explains the page file options needed for memory dumps of all kind.

 

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/254649

[Super Fast]

I think the old Windows XP way of doing things was to set your Pagefile to 1/2 of your total RAM, but honestly 8GB of RAM and you don't actually need a pagefile. 1GB is fine.

 

I don't run with a pagefile anymore on my computer, as it has 12GB of RAM.

 

 

Why I have a pagefile > Firefox

 

Firefox is memory hungry, & this is on the latest 7 of it.

It is easy to run out of RAM using Firefox, because it caches your back button histories, undo closed tab, browser sessions, previous webpages, etc, to memory.

 

And I regularly hit the limits of my RAM because I open a few hundred websites pretty often.

I plan to update my RAM size soon, but until then, if I did not have a paging file, as soon as my machine ran out of RAM, it would bluescreen & crash.

 

While I do think a smaller paging file is fine for systems with more memory, I also think that having at least around 1 GB paging file is a lot better than no paging file.

You don't want to blue screen if you DO run out of memory, do you?

[Winapp2.ini]

I have never used all 12 gigabytes of RAM before, so I can't say.

[eL_PuSHeR]

I have set my pagefile to an initial size of 200MB (using 4 GB RAM on x86 system). I haven't noticed anything inusual.