No clue whatsoever. Regards,
Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php -----Original Message----- From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 1:42 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Speaking of page file yea true, but what do you think about proximity to the system files? -- ME2 On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Michael B. Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't think any modern drive cares about the physical location of a file > on the platters anymore. > > Now, Windows operates slightly better if the first few percent of a drive > are logically empty (so it doesn't have to search for an open spot to put > something). That's one of the prime benefits jkdefrag gives you with its > "default" optimization criteria. > > Regards, > > Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP > My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael > I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:23 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Speaking of page file > > Or on the system drive partition (if you have mutliple). The pagefile > will be a lot closer to the inner tracks of the disc, where > read/writes are faster because of the closer sector proximity. > > If you are moving it back to the system partition after it being > somewhere else, be sure to use a defragger that can optimize its > location back to the beginning of the disc. > > Or something like that. Someone a bit more tech can feel free to rip > me a new one if I said that wrong. > > -- > ME2 > > > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Ames Matthew B <[email protected]> wrote: >> Better stick it on a separate disk :-) >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: 29 January 2009 14:57 >> To: NT System Admin Issues >> Subject: Re: Speaking of page file >> >> But not recommended. >> >> -- >> ME2 >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 9:30 AM, David Lum <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Wow, brilliant! So simple, so obvious....explains why I never thought >> of >>> it J >>> >>> David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER >>> NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION >>> (Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764 >>> >>> From: Jim Majorowicz [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 10:39 PM >>> >>> To: NT System Admin Issues >>> Subject: RE: Speaking of page file >>> >>> >>> >>> When I can, I'll create a separate partition just for the page file. >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Paul Everett [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 2:23 PM >>> >>> To: NT System Admin Issues >>> Subject: Speaking of page file >>> >>> >>> >>> Anyone routinely defrag page file on their Servers? >>> >>> Is there a best practices for this? >>> >>> What program do you use for this? >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Paul Everett >>> IS Dept. >>> Lee Mental Health Center >>> 239-791-1551 >>> >>> "Lee Mental Health Center, Inc. providing services through Ruth Cooper >> >>> Center for Behavioral Health Care and VISTA Behavioral Crisis >> Services. >>> Visit our website at www.leementalhealth.org to learn more." >>> >>> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any >>> attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may >>> contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized >> review, use, disclosure, or >>> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, >> please >>> contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the >>> original message, including attachments. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ >> <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ >> The information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent >> correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended >> recipient(s). The information in this communication may be >> confidential and/or legally privileged. Nothing in this e-mail is >> intended to conclude a contract on behalf of QinetiQ or make QinetiQ >> subject to any other legally binding commitments, unless the e-mail >> contains an express statement to the contrary or incorporates a formal > Purchase Order. >> >> For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, >> distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance >> on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. >> >> Emails and other electronic communication with QinetiQ may be >> monitored and recorded for business purposes including security, audit >> and archival purposes. Any response to this email indicates consent >> to this. >> >> Telephone calls to QinetiQ may be monitored or recorded for quality >> control, security and other business purposes. >> >> QinetiQ Limited >> Registered in England & Wales: Company Number:3796233 >> Registered office: 85 Buckingham Gate, London SW1E 6PD, United Kingdom >> Trading address: Cody Technology Park, Cody Building, Ively Road, > Farnborough, Hampshire, GU14 0LX, United Kingdom >> http://www.qinetiq.com/home/notices/legal.html >> >> ~ 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/> ~ > > > ~ 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/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
