Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

ME & IE & huge swap file problems

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Kevin Brown

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 8:47:36 PM3/13/02
to
Just got a new PC with Win ME. Came with IE 5.5 that I
updated to SP2 (?). Anyway, latest 5.5 version.

I tried to do the vitual memory trick, of setting the min
and max the same at anywhere from 2.5 to 4x of my RAM.

So, I have 128 MB RAM. I tried anywhere from 300 to 500.

I get system out of memory warnings, usually specifically
when I'm using IE. I checked the size of the swap file
and I get 65-85 MB without IE running, but as soon as I
start surfing and opening up a few windows in IE, the swap
file ballons out to ~1800 MB! I exit IE, and bingo, after
a few minutes, the swap file drops back down to the same
size as before.

I was running IE 5.5 on Win 98SE before (different PC),
and never had this problem.

Any ideas?

I've already turned off System Restore and the SFB (?)
stuff, but I still seem to have wmiexe.exe running. Don't
know if that's the culprit.

Richard G. Harper

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 9:08:49 PM3/13/02
to
Don't do the "virtual memory trick". If you want to set a minimum do so,
but do NOT SET A MAXIMUM aside from the maximum allowed, the remaining free
drive space.

--
Richard G. Harper (rgha...@email.com) MSMVP MPS-D
* NOTE - Private E-Mail is generally not replied to. Please post all
* questions and replies in the newsgroups for the benefit of everyone.
* Help US help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


"Kevin Brown" <kevin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:314a01c1cafa$37647610$a5e62ecf@tkmsftngxa07...

Kevin Brown

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 8:19:50 PM3/14/02
to
Richard- Why not? This was a very valuable trick for Win
95 and Win 98. Saves system resources that would be spent
constantly resizing the swap file...

Thanks...

>.
>

Jack E Martinelli

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 8:47:13 PM3/14/02
to
Mr. Brown, Win98 and WinME are quite different from Win95 re: memory and
system resource management.
Please review
http://www.aumha.org/a/memmgmt.htm
http://www.aumha.org/a/resource.htm
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca/tips.htm#resources
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca/tips.htm#virtual
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/prodt
echnol/win98/reskit/part5/wrkc26.asp

--
Jack E. Martinelli 2002 MVP for Win9X / DTS
Help us help you: http://www.dts-L.org/goodpost.htm
Your cooperation is appreciated.
--------


"Kevin Brown" <kevin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:332d01c1cbbf$80fc1240$3bef2ecf@TKMSFTNGXA10...


> Richard- Why not? This was a very valuable trick for Win
> 95 and Win 98. Saves system resources that would be spent
> constantly resizing the swap file...
>
> Thanks...
>

<snip>

Richard G. Harper

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 10:57:15 PM3/14/02
to
What Jack said. :-)

Too many people get hung up on swapfile SIZE and what effect it might have
on performance or resources or such. Unfortunately it's not a valid
measurement of anything meaningful. You should never pay any attention to
the size of the swapfile in regard to any performance or resource issues.

Setting a maximum swapfile size is an inherently unhealthy thing to do. I
once watched a friend disregard this advice, set her swapfile to a size that
I told her would be dangerous, and then watched Windows crash with an "Out
of Memory" error and eat itself. Her hard drive was corrupted beyond the
ability to repair - a reformat and reinstall was required.

When you set a fixed swapfile size or set a maximum swapfile size and then
load programs and data that exceed the size of your actual memory plus
swapfile, one of three things is guaranteed to happen. If you're
exceedingly lucky, you'll get an "Out of Memory" error and that will be the
end of it - closing some programs will allow you to recover. If you're
somewhat less lucky, your system will hang or crash and you'll lose all
unsaved data in all programs. The very unlucky will join my friend in
reinstalling Windows.

There's an extremely simple way to avoid any of these three problems ...
NEVER SET AN ARTIFICIAL MAXIMUM SWAPFILE SIZE. No maximum, no problem. If
you wish to try to avoid swapfile resizing, set a healthy minimum size but
leave the maximum at the largest value it can be set at.

--
Richard G. Harper (rgha...@email.com) MSMVP MPS-D
* NOTE - Private E-Mail is generally not replied to. Please post all
* questions and replies in the newsgroups for the benefit of everyone.
* Help US help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


"Kevin Brown" <kevin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:332d01c1cbbf$80fc1240$3bef2ecf@TKMSFTNGXA10...

Kevin Brown

unread,
Mar 15, 2002, 3:25:43 PM3/15/02
to
Cool, thanks guys. Setting just the minimum makes sense.

I'll have to check out those links too Jack... :-)

>.
>

0 new messages