Is it a good idea to make a partition just for swap file?

Is this a good idea or is it ok to have the swap file on my main OS partition?

People say that for best performance, you should have a separate FAT16 partition only for the swap file, since FAT16 is faster than FAT32 or NTFS.

I don't know if the difference is noticeable (I never did it).

I have 2 30Gb HDs in RAID 0, one 10 gb partition for OS and apps and the rest for my stuff. I leave the swap file in the 50Gb partition.

If you have a RAID 0+1 at 160gb usable space, can you have 10gb NTFS, 5gb FAT16, and the remaining NTFS? Or does the whole setup have to be either FAT16 or NTFS since it's kinda one drive?

each partition you create may have the format you choose

In your case I would create one 10 gb for system (C: NTFS), 1 gb for swap (D: FAT16) and the rest NTFS.

Some say the swap file should remain in the middle of the harddrive so it will always be "nearer". But as I said before, I doubt the performance differences would be noticeable.

eliteoneXP said:

Is this a good idea or is it ok to have the swap file on my main OS partition?

Click to expand...

Yes it is, also if your running XP Home | Pro its also a good idea to have 2 swap files according to M$.

eliteoneXP said:

Is this a good idea or is it ok to have the swap file on my main OS partition?

Click to expand...

put simply. NO. imagine the two partitions on the same dive. now, bearing in mind that windows uses the swapfile A LOT, imagine the head of the hard drive swining from one side of the drive to the other, every single time you read or write from the swap. BAD IDEA.

the best way is to have it on a completly seperate drive. allowing windows to read from the swap whilst simultaniously doing everything else it does.

THe absolute best is to span the swap across the two drives - allowing you to access it twice as fast.

"the best way is to have it on a completly seperate drive. allowing windows to read from the swap whilst simultaniously doing everything else it does."

This is quite correct. Gains in speed and smoothness are something to experience for sure This is how a swapfile should be setup, if possible.........

I had the pagefile on its own partition for months and i have finally stopped, literally, it does nothing noticeable. Even when fragmentation is concerned, about having your min/max sizes the same but still have it on its own partition to improve it further, imo I have found this to be bs, whilst the min/max hella works - putting it on its own partition did zilch

how big should I setup the swap files if I have one in the boot partition and one in a separate partition? 1.5x RAM in both or .75x RAM in both?

ajrettke said:

how big should I setup the swap files if I have one in the boot partition and one in a separate partition? 1.5x RAM in both or .75x RAM in both?

Click to expand...

Seems to me it'd be 1.5x RAM in both.

Well, I don't know wether putting it on a seperate partion will make a diffrence, but I do know that it would anchor the sucker at one spot! I've seen my swapfile move from almost the begining of my drive all the way now to around the 40GB mark on it. Don't know if keeping it at the 10GB mark or so would speed it up any though.

As for swapfile sizes, you may want to use a custom swapfile size. I've allways thought that the 'rules' for sizing were stupid, and that they should be thrown out. If you've got XP, open the Task Manager (with CTRL+ALT+DEL), and go to the Performance tab. Look under the 'Commit Charge' for 'Peak'. This is the most virtual memory your computer has used since boot (in KB). Set your swap file size to this value plus about 100MB (just in case).

I never use more than 400MB of swapfile on my computer, though going by the 1.5 rule, I'd need much more.

JigPu

Hi,

Just another point of view : I keep one partition for swap, and all temporary usage : temp files, hibernate files, transient products, download directories, navigator hostory and page buffers, print spoolers, and 'ripping' space. With time, this has aquired a lot of sense (actually this partition alone is 26 Gb in my rig), this makes a big chunk of my disk that I don't have to worry about backing up.

Regards
FTC

For simultanius reads and writes the swap file needs to be on a seperate controler. the speed gains are noticable. also it will not get fragmented if its got its own partion.
with bus master it is posible for u to have 2 disks on the standard controler as masters with the optical drives as slaves. as u may have noiticed on the fly only works when the optical drives are on seperate chanels therefore u will be able to do simultanius (near as) raeds and writes between the disks.