Windows 7 |
Post Reply | Page <1 456 |
Author | ||||||||||||||||
Magic Man
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Location: South Wales Points: 5336 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||||||||
You are talking rubbish again I'm afraid. There is nothing really to understand about rubbish that I am not getting. Again, stop skirting around the edge, your whole point was that it is somehow better to run without a page file under real conditions (not your imaginary unlimited memory scenario) which is why you switched it off. You are just posting diversionary fluff. Okay, let's go back to the "point [you are] making" and that I apparently don't understand. Your experiment to show and prove that "the system does not care if the file is on disk or not". You stated...
Except, in reality, you never did delete the FS9.exe when it was running did you? You just assumed that moving it or renaming it would prove the same point. Because (as I wondered earlier and later found out and verified myself) there is no worry about what happens with the pager trying to access this file that no longer exists because you are prevented from deleting the file in the first place. Try it this time rather than assuming - you'll get a big fat dialog... "Cannot delete FS9: Access denied" Reason why there are no issues when you move it or rename it is because the OS keeps tracks of the file so remains able to page out memory relating to it and page it back in from the file if required. FS9.exe was still "backed by a file on the HD" as I put it all along... Now, let's move on to your issue with the fact that memory pages that are backed, i.e. those that have come directly from the hd in the form of an .exe (your fs9.exe for example) or .dlls etc are freed if required and then paged back in directly from the file. I have explained this several times. In response to those explanations you have stated...
Okay, here we go then, how about...
and...
and...
and...
From where? Microsoft Developer Network. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms810613.aspx - memory mapped files. You should take a look. Also points out the benefits of using a page file for sharing data between processes which can prevent "a waste of system resources". Nice big diagrams as well showing the page file as a key part of the overall memory management - strange that if it's not really that important and not needed as you say... Also...
Same library, section detailing the virtual memory manager in Windows NT.
Strange, nothing there about the performance benefits of disabling the page file though... Just to close with a few of your own statements...
I think we should call it a day there shouldn't we... Apologies to all others for this and all the quotes here etc. Normal service will be resumed shortly... |
||||||||||||||||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||||||||
I assumed nothing, and did try it. This is why it can't be deleted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory-mapped_file#Platform_support Been a damn long time since I read about this. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms810613.aspx Holy cow - I was hardly 11 years old when I last read about this (1993). FYI I've been doing this stuff since I was 4 (I started out on a System 19 - that is One Nine - writing machine code, then moved to the Motorola 6800 before I got my first PC). I thought MMF went out back then. Didn't realize they were still using it. I never use it - thought it was depricated (back in 1995 to give you an idea - when Win 95 was released to be exact). I've only thought this for a mere 16 years. When they introduced the swap file in Win 3.x, I thought it was the replacement and MMF was simply for backwards compatibility. Those were the days!! I've been bashing my head against the wall for years trying to figure out why that ****ing file won't delete when an app is running, yet you could read it. Never thought it was this method of access that was behind it (I was that convinced it was depricated). Note carefully that the article says that all 6 memory access methods are totally independent of each other. On this point I raise my hand and say "I'm wrong". I did quote sources though. Always important. I'm , seriously. I still stand by my other comments though. O/T: Still got one of these in the loft: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KIM-1 ...and I still use one of these! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEK6800D2 Damn good processor. FYI the group of 4 LEDSs are the memory address, and the group of two on the right are the data/instruction as necessary. They are split like this for easier reading whilst debugging. 0A - LOAD A 03 - DATA 0B - LOAD B 23 - DATA 1C - ACC A + ACC B -> ACC A 3F - HALT I think that is correct. Load accumulator A with "03", load accumulator B with "23" sum the two and store in accumulator A. By looking in accumulator A I should have the value "26" (remembering it is HEX!!!!!). Best regards, Vulcan. |
||||||||||||||||
MartinW
Moderator in Command Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: United Kingdom Points: 26722 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||||||||
Game set and match to magic then?
|
||||||||||||||||
Magic Man
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Location: South Wales Points: 5336 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||||||||
To be fair to our pointy friend, whilst looking for the backup stuff for this, it's clear that just like in any other subject misonceptions can quickly take hold and spread far and wide. There was a suprising amount of stuff on technical sites that got it wrong as well and they were meant to be the experts advising others.
Not sure if anyone else is interested but during my trawls came across the little tool available here... http://www.tmurgent.com/Tool_ATM.aspx - which gives a great view of what is going on in your PCs memory.
To come back to a 'issue' mentioned in the past by others (and one in particular who will remain anonymous... ) regarding Vista being a memory hog, using all the memory etc. to which the usual reply has become, "its designed to use all the memory it can, unused memory is wasted memory" etc. - this tool shows that very nicely. Reboot etc. and you'll see the precache stuff empty, slowly filling up as it does it's stuff, caching stuff it thinks you'll use based on past experience. If you need that memory for anything else, it'll just dump it out.
Which ones? No, second thoughts, don't answer that...
( no really, don't answer that... group hug instead)
.
.
.
.
[deep voice]"Windows - the memory manager conspiracy" a Slim Martin production.[/deep voice]
--- The End ---
|
||||||||||||||||
MartinW
Moderator in Command Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: United Kingdom Points: 26722 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||||||||
Magic... run away quick, change the subject, anything, but don't dwell.
If you like I'll set up a diversion, 9/11 perhaps?
Edit: I've diverted him with talk of dinosaurs, lost worlds etc, in another topic.
|
||||||||||||||||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||||||||
Strangely enough, I did get Process Viewer - apparently it could release all file handles without terminating the holding process.
There is one secret weapon in the arsenal I did consider: Windows File Permissions. Take your favorite app, and deny access to it whilst it is running. It will prevent the process from coming back to the file later (if it ever should). Next best thing to deleting it. Best regards, Vulcan. |
||||||||||||||||
Post Reply | Page <1 456 |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |