re: memory reporting, even the "working set" value you get from the 'performance monitor' doesn't really necessarily tell you how much RAM the process is actually using just for itself, because this value includes any shared memory, not just private memory. I'm honestly sorry that I can't recall which MS guy said it, or exactly how he phrased it, but the gist of it was that you really cannot tell exactly how much RAM/pagefile is being used by processes since some of the data being reported to you includes memory that is shared between processes, and some of the values only relate to virtual memory space allocated. I just remember reading this during one of the windows betas in MS's beta newsgroups, possibly the initial release of XP. I imagine it was in the 'performance' group and came from one of the guys that deals with memory management. Yeah, yeah, anecdotal. But if you look through their various memory management/monitoring articles you get basically the same information. Most of the memory usage values reported are vritual memory stats, not real/physical memory, and even the value for the working set is 'dirtied' by shared memory. You can get a good enough idea from all the various reported values, yeah. But you can't get exact figures. Hell, they even changed task manager's title from mem usage to PF usage, and for good reason.
Setting that option *does* reduce paging. I'm not disputing that. I only disputed that it is going to change the paging behaviour of applications. Clearly it will not, since applications and their memory don't fall under the umbrella of this setting, which only deals with the executive (NTExecutive I believe is the proper name) and the things which belong to it. i.e. kernel and drivers. On 8/15/05, James Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > The discussions on MSDN are not important here, as the process scheduler > was made to report accurately for SP2(XP) and SP1(2k3). Amoung other > things this is a requirement for DEP internals. Most of these docs can > be found through a partner login. Sadly, the only public docs I've found > so far are the exact same as you have just sent. > > The latter of which is an old bug we used to suffer frequently on our > Citrix mainframes. (Ah, the reason he's been screwing with process and > memory management!). > > > N.B. Did ya miss MS's other two support sites? (just joking, I _love_ > the way they make us trawl 5 different places for info ;-). > > -- > > None of these negate what I have said. In fact all they do is negate > what you said about never changing from defaults, as here you will find > MS suggesting that people look at these articles for their solutions > (having been on the phone for hours to MS waiting for some id-10t (it's > been a while) to point me to Q184419, despite being outdated and useless > to the problems we ever encounter on the citrix platforms. The techs are > never as good as the consultants. :-( > > Back to the point in hand, setting this option can reduce paging in > certain instances where the data paged is stored in driver space - this > is particularly more common in certian development scnearios. You CAN > analyse these effects by careful observation of kernel and process > running times, along with changes in memory deltas and other less > important varaibles. Generally you will need a program in ring 0 to > properly observe these things though, and never forget that everything > you do on the system affects the system. > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- Clayton Macleod >get ye flask You cannot get ye flask. _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
