bowie92
asked on
no spare stack pages
i got a message on bootup that i have no spare stack pages, and i should increase the setting of "minsp's"
in the system.ini. and that i have 3 pages now. i went on because i didn;t know what to do. seems to be o.k. but what do you think, does this need to be increased and how do you go about doing this? i need to also let you know i just installed a scanner and had a few lock-ups and had to shut down and reboot from them. don't know if this had any effect on this message or not.
thanks jim
in the system.ini. and that i have 3 pages now. i went on because i didn;t know what to do. seems to be o.k. but what do you think, does this need to be increased and how do you go about doing this? i need to also let you know i just installed a scanner and had a few lock-ups and had to shut down and reboot from them. don't know if this had any effect on this message or not.
thanks jim
in config.sys file add the line stacks=9256 and try.
>>in config.sys file add the line stacks=9256
It won't work. STACK value ranges between 8 and 64.
¿ Perhaps you wanted to say STACKS=9,256 ?
It won't work. STACK value ranges between 8 and 64.
¿ Perhaps you wanted to say STACKS=9,256 ?
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
yes, it should be 9,256, Thank You!
I thought
>STACKS=9,256
was one of old DOS ways, and Windoze don't do them no more.
So DOS will never go away, huh?
>STACKS=9,256
was one of old DOS ways, and Windoze don't do them no more.
So DOS will never go away, huh?
ASKER
to sysexpert; hey, good answer, you explained what i need to do and how to do it very clear, i went to "8" and have not had any problem in three days of use. thanks for the help,jim
Why was my comment not accepted as an answer when the response that was accepted was taken from the Link I gave?
No, friend Celtics; the link you posted specifies MinSPS=4, whereas Sysexpert's answer states MinSPS=12
As you can the, the answer is *NOT* the same.
As you can the, the answer is *NOT* the same.
viking,
The accepted answer contains quoted lines from the link I provided, that is why I ask this. The response that was accepted is a rehash of the link I provided.
Lines that match :
1) If the problem persists, increase the number of spare stack pages in increments of 4 (for example, 8, 12, 16).
2) If Windows detects that it has run out of spare stack pages, the warning message stated above is displayed. Windows 98 continues to operate normally unless a device driver encounters a stack overflow condition when there are no free spare stack pages.
3) add the following line to the [386Enh] section of the System.ini file
Number 2 is not an exact match, but it is too close for a coincidence.
Enough whining, on to bigger and better things.
The accepted answer contains quoted lines from the link I provided, that is why I ask this. The response that was accepted is a rehash of the link I provided.
Lines that match :
1) If the problem persists, increase the number of spare stack pages in increments of 4 (for example, 8, 12, 16).
2) If Windows detects that it has run out of spare stack pages, the warning message stated above is displayed. Windows 98 continues to operate normally unless a device driver encounters a stack overflow condition when there are no free spare stack pages.
3) add the following line to the [386Enh] section of the System.ini file
Number 2 is not an exact match, but it is too close for a coincidence.
Enough whining, on to bigger and better things.
>>1) If the problem persists, increase the number of spare stack pages in
>>increments of 4 (for example, 8, 12, 16).
Aha... you're right.
>>increments of 4 (for example, 8, 12, 16).
Aha... you're right.
ditto
Lest we be incomplete, the link also addressed the comments above on config.sys type parameters, warning that that type of use of 'stack' term is different part of O/S and N/A.
Lest we be incomplete, the link also addressed the comments above on config.sys type parameters, warning that that type of use of 'stack' term is different part of O/S and N/A.
ASKER
like i said in my comment to sysexpert , he explained it to me in his own words and not just click on a link for help, i gave points to the one i thought earned them by a little more effort although the end results was very similar. thanks for all your help, really every one was right on the answer and narrowed down to the same thing but could only give credit to the one i thought did the best.
yep, unlike school, only one gets a 'grade'. Not "in your shoes" I do not know what I would have done if it was my question. All I ask of a grader is to highlight something that looks like a solution to others that may experience same problem, and you have done that, need do no more. You may prefer URLs that 'bless' an argument (like 'authority' of a Microsoft) or prefer no URLs, being one who can also surf/search web, more desiring of human logic/words. You need not declare the why of it, the goal is to find something useful to yourself. And you did that.
But there is a difference between:
> earned them by a little more effort
and
> taken from the Link I gave
I assume you can see that.
The first one was passive in "only applicable article I could find" while the latter was assertive "This is true for all versions of Windows"
While the MicroSoft link had this:
M$> Version : WINDOWS:95
(only)
So the thread could read better if other references were submitted to back up claim for win3.x, Win98, and WinNT v#.# needing the same effort.
Or, if the accepted answer had shown
> The default number of spare stack pages is 2.
To indicate the 'Why' behind either
> that i have 3 pages now
or
> [386Enh]
> MinSPs=12
So I would not view it like:
> explained it to me in his own words
so much, and can understand some of celtics' response, but still, I do not know whether I would have graded same or different had I had to. You did well enough here for me, I am satisfied.
Especially since you found something to help you out in a short amount of time.
But there is a difference between:
> earned them by a little more effort
and
> taken from the Link I gave
I assume you can see that.
The first one was passive in "only applicable article I could find" while the latter was assertive "This is true for all versions of Windows"
While the MicroSoft link had this:
M$> Version : WINDOWS:95
(only)
So the thread could read better if other references were submitted to back up claim for win3.x, Win98, and WinNT v#.# needing the same effort.
Or, if the accepted answer had shown
> The default number of spare stack pages is 2.
To indicate the 'Why' behind either
> that i have 3 pages now
or
> [386Enh]
> MinSPs=12
So I would not view it like:
> explained it to me in his own words
so much, and can understand some of celtics' response, but still, I do not know whether I would have graded same or different had I had to. You did well enough here for me, I am satisfied.
Especially since you found something to help you out in a short amount of time.
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q149/0/83.asp?LNG=ENG&SA=ALLKB&FR=0