IIRC, it has everything to do with the dump file. Not only does the DF contain whatever was in RAM at the time of a crash, but system related info as well (services running, etc).
Don Guyer Systems Engineer Information Services Prudential Fox Roach/ Trident 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Ph: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 www.prufoxroach.com [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: Ben Scott [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 3:15 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Why is the min. rec. paging file size 1.5x? On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 3:02 PM, Micheal Espinola Jr <[email protected]> wrote: > It still exists (the 1.5x recommendation) in the most recent knowledge > base articles, and is the default setting for the current OS's. From reading MSKB articles, I've always gotten the impression that nobody at Microsoft remembers where the 1.5-times-physical-RAM idea came from, either. :) Something in the dim, dusty reaches of the back of my mind says it might have had something to do with memory over-commitment, or the lack thereof, but that might be a different OS I'm thinking of. I did just find MSKB 274598. If I read that right, no version of Win32 can create a memory dump over 2 GB in size. If so, if you're not running Win64, and you have more than 2 GB RAM, there's no point in worrying about page file size for full memory dumps, since the OS can't handle it anyway. > And of course, back in the day, something threw in the +2mb addition, > which I dont think I ever understood. It has something to do with memory dumps. I think it might be that meta-data about the dump gets stored there. That would make sense, since the rest of the file might be full of a copy of your RAM. -- Ben ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
