- DATARAM RAMDISK KEY RECOVERY FULL
- DATARAM RAMDISK KEY RECOVERY SOFTWARE
- DATARAM RAMDISK KEY RECOVERY WINDOWS 7
All I know is that XP is using 4gb, and I'm able to put a bunch of cache and temp stuff on the ramdisk in the "unused" 4gb - it's nice to think that now it's being used.
DATARAM RAMDISK KEY RECOVERY FULL
I've read the windows documentation to get a loose understanding of why XP and programs can "see" the full 8gb, but not use it - but I really don't care. I put the windows page file, some graphics programs' temp and cache folders there, etc. Then I grabbed VSuite Ramdisk free, and make a ramdisk out of that unused 4gb. So Windows XP sees 4gb, and 4gb are unused. Ram is cheap, so getting 8gb wasn't that much more expensive than getting 4gb (20 bucks, maybe?). Plenty of friends laughing at me for not just springing for win7, but I just don't have any need or interest to justify the $150+, so I'm sticking with XP. So I built a new PC, and have a licensed copy of XP Pro, and am using an ssd as my main system drive. It's nice to have a super fast scratch disk, and it's nice to use that gig of RAM that Windows was ignoring. Once it's created, it remains until the next boot.īrowser usage SEEMS faster. On my system, sometimes Windows chooses not to create a paging file on the ram disk, I guess since the bigger virtual memory page file on D: is sufficient. Windows has to recreate the page file on the ramdisk, since it doesn't save to/read from disk upon shut downs/boots. It's not as well featured as some ramdisks. It should use NTFS instead of FAT32, for file compression. Move your virtual memory page file, or a portion of it.
DATARAM RAMDISK KEY RECOVERY WINDOWS 7
Windows 7 still reports 3036 MB of physical memory, so it must be small.Īfter you configure it, you have to move things to the ramdisk. I think it runs "outside of" Windows, since it's not running as a process, and I'm pretty sure it's not running as a service, either.
DATARAM RAMDISK KEY RECOVERY SOFTWARE
Once configured, the Gavotte software runs automatically on following boots. So, yes, the "Completely wrong" rant by Anonymous is. With PAE, the ramdisk indeed uses the RAM above 3 mb, inaccessible to 32-bit Windows 7. To use the RAM beyond 3mb, PAE *must* be enabled. Gavotte works on x86 Windows 7, so it ought to work on Vista, too. Putting a paging file on a RAMdisk is a self-evidently absurd idea in theory, and actual measurement proves it to be a terrible idea in practice. You don't have to for page faults resolved on the standby or modified lists. And even for those page faults resolved to the RAMdisk paging file, you are still having to go through the disk drivers. Committing RAM to a RAMdisk and putting a paging file on it makes fewer pages available for those lists, making that mechanism much less effective.
so if you access a page you lost from your working set recently, odds are its contents are still in memory, on one of those lists. The memory access behavior of most apps being what it is, you tend to access the same sets of pages over time. They're kept on the modified and standby page lists, respectively. Pages lost from working sets are not written out to disk immediately (or at all if they weren't modified), and even after being written out to disk, are not assigned to another process immediately. Also: the system is ALREADY caching pages in memory. But thanks to the paging file in RAM, you'll have more of them.
And, you will also be increasing the page faults that have to be resolved to exe's and dll's, and the paging file in RAM won't do diddly to speed those up. Now you might say "yeah, but those additional page faults will go faster than they otherwise would because they're satisfied in RAM." True, but it is still better to not incur them in the first place. You can't do this unless you have plenty of RAM and if you have plenty of RAM, you aren't hitting your paging file very often in the first place! Conversely, if you don't have plenty of RAM, dedicating some of it to a RAM drive will only increase your page fault rate. Reality - "Putting a Paging File in a RAM drive is a ridiculous idea in theory, and almost always a performance hit when tested under real-world workloads. Myth - "Putting the Paging File on a RAMdisk improves performance."
0 kommentar(er)
