Final word on XP page file size?
Posted on 2003-11-03
I have read various guidelines on how to best set the page file size, including these, with their downsides:
-Set the low end equal to the ram size, and the high end to 2.5 times the ram size, but I'm told that this uses resources while XP manages the size.
-Set the low and high to the same number, and 2.5 the size of ram, so XP does not have to manage it. But I'm told that the user will be in 'big trouble' if XP ever needs more.
-Set it so that XP automatically manages it, like in Win98. I have seen Microsoft recommend this approach on their site. But I'm told that XP will have to manage this, wasting resources. And, after setting it this way for numerous users in real-life environments, they still get warnings saying they are low!
So what's the bottom line on the best way to manage the page file size? To me, 'best' means that it gives maximum benefit with few downsides, and does not continue to warn the user that they've got 'problems', which worries them needlessly!