Sorry about the long delay, I have been away-from-list.
(And I just had to say something...those of you groaning about this thread 
will be happy to know that this is pretty much my final word on it, 
regardless of any reply:)

At 06:25 PM 1/11/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Eliminating the swapfile, or making it small can cause problems with 
>win2k, like
>unexplained errors, or program mysteriously closing.  No matter how much 
>system ram
>you have, I do not recommend it.

Just to set the record straight, I have been using Win2k for quite awhile 
now, and have never had this happen, nor has anyone I know that is running 
a 2mb swapfile had this happen.
Works great for us.  In fact, as long as I stay away from the spreadsheet 
editor, I don't generally ever have errors in Protel :)
You would have to provide a repeatable example with an application that I 
can get access to, to convince me.
There shouldn't be any reason why a small swapfile would cause problems.  I 
would sure like to read about any documented problems with this, if anyone 
can point me to them.
If I recall correctly, your swapfile MUST be LARGER than your memory size 
if you have your 2K system set to do a complete memory dump on a Stop (BSOD).
Also, I think in order to do the other memory dumps you must have a 
swapfile of at least 2MB in case of a Stop.  This is the reason for the 2MB 
minimum.  Anyone who remembers the appropriate MS KB article can quote it 
if so motivated.  Not observing the above minimums will get you locked into 
an endless loop of reboots, as I recall.  And it isn't easily fixable.
My advice is to set the computer to an option besides complete memory 
dump...what would you do with a complete memory dump anyway?

>Maybe I didn't make myself clear.  3x is an under-exaggeration.
I suppose you are going to tell me that the Protel autorouter will run 3X 
faster when chewing on a huge board.
Everyone here knows that the processor isn't going to go 3X faster than it 
did before... the assertion is that there will be less HD activity, enough 
to cause a performance increase during CERTAIN TYPES of computer 
activity.  Please be clear on these claims.  Unqualified Grandstanding 
doesn't do anything but create controversy.....

 From another post:
At 07:48 PM 1/11/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>You are correct.  Unfortunately in windows programming, when allocation 
>ram for
>storage, you can define system ram only, any memory available, and you may 
>define swap file ram as preference.  It's these type of programs which may 

How many examples of programs that cause these problems do you know 
of?  Could you cite some please?

>Quartus II building an almost 1 million gate PLD)
>No swapfile, 2 gig system memory : Out of system resources after 5 minutes.

Hmmm.  System Resources?  They aren't unlimited in Win2K, but 100Gigs of 
Ram and a Terabyte swapfile should make no difference whatsoever in the 
size of the System Resources.  If you can cite something to the contrary, 
I'm all ears.
I would be very interested in recreating by any means your experience of 
running out of system resources due to swapfile size settings.  Short of 
Quartus II, that is.  I don't own that program.  Is there any other example 
you can cite?

Feel free to contact me off-list if you feel its more appropriate.


Frank Gilley
Dell-Star Technologies
(918) 838-1973 Phone
(918) 838-8814 Fax

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* To leave this list visit:
* Contact the list manager:
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to