A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows XP » Customizing Windows XP
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Performance Tweak that Failed



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 30th 03, 11:22 PM
Robert H. Risch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Performance Tweak that Failed

I decided to try the "System Cache Boost" tweak, #9b at
http://datacreek.net/webgear/tips/xptweaks.html . It reads,

"Changing the value of the key LargeSystemCache from 0 to 1 will tell
Windows XP to allocate all but 4MB of system memory to the file system
cache, basically meaning that the XP Kernel can run in memory, greatly
improving it's speed. The 4MB of memory left is used for disk caching, but
if for any reason more is needed, XP allocates more. Generally, this tweak
improves performance by a fair bit but can, in some intensive applications,
degrade performance. As with the above tweak, you should have at least 256MB
of RAM before attempting to enable LargeSystemCache".

Since I have 768MB of RAM, this seemed okay to try. When I rebooted, the
display was set to the lowest resolution and color depth and could not be
modified by using display properties. Also the following message popped
up,
"Error loading C:\Winnt\System32\NvCpl.dll. A dynamic link library (DLL)
initialization routine failed".

I had no trouble reverting my hard drive to the previous state but I am
curious to know why it didn't work. Has anybody else found that this tweak
gives trouble? Thanks.

RHR


Ads
  #2  
Old May 31st 03, 05:03 PM
Thorsten Matzner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Performance Tweak that Failed

"Robert H. Risch" wrote:

I decided to try the "System Cache Boost" tweak, #9b at
http://datacreek.net/webgear/tips/xptweaks.html . It reads,

"Changing the value of the key LargeSystemCache from 0 to 1 will tell
Windows XP to allocate all but 4MB of system memory to the file system
cache, basically meaning that the XP Kernel can run in memory, greatly
improving it's speed.


If I understand "How to Optimize Windows NT Server Using the Registry"
(http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=232271) correctly and if this
still applies to Windows XP you can simply change this setting in the
Control Panel System Advanced Performance Settings Advanced
without manually editing the Registry. The default setting is 0 what
is recommended for machines that do not work as a server. You may want
to change the setting and see if this leads to the same results. I
would not be too surprised about that because a Server (for which the
setting of 1 is the optimum) does not have a need for comfortable
video settings.

--
(tm)
  #3  
Old June 1st 03, 05:38 PM
Robert H. Risch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Performance Tweak that Failed


"Thorsten Matzner" wrote in message
...
"Robert H. Risch" wrote:

I decided to try the "System Cache Boost" tweak, #9b at
http://datacreek.net/webgear/tips/xptweaks.html . It reads,

"Changing the value of the key LargeSystemCache from 0 to 1 will tell
Windows XP to allocate all but 4MB of system memory to the file system
cache, basically meaning that the XP Kernel can run in memory, greatly
improving it's speed.


If I understand "How to Optimize Windows NT Server Using the Registry"
(http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=232271) correctly and if this
still applies to Windows XP you can simply change this setting in the
Control Panel System Advanced Performance Settings Advanced
without manually editing the Registry. The default setting is 0 what
is recommended for machines that do not work as a server. You may want
to change the setting and see if this leads to the same results. I
would not be too surprised about that because a Server (for which the
setting of 1 is the optimum) does not have a need for comfortable
video settings.

Yes, you can use that menu to change Memory usage from best performance for
Programs to best performance for System cache. After rebooting you have the
same problems as if you changed the registry key. Maybe that tweak worked
with an earlier version of XP. One strange thing is that I couldn't fix
things by changing the Memory usage option back to Programs. When I opened
up the menu is was set to Programs as if I hadn't changed it. However
rebooting again still left things with the crippled graphics, so I had to
revert the drive, as before. Thanks for your help.

RHR


  #4  
Old June 1st 03, 08:21 PM
Thorsten Matzner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Performance Tweak that Failed

"Robert H. Risch" wrote:

Thanks for your help.


You are welcome. I do not know why this does not work correctly on
your computer, but maybe someone else has more experience with
altering this setting. I never used it because I do not run a server
here.

--
(tm)
  #5  
Old June 3rd 03, 02:36 AM
Robert H. Risch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Performance Tweak that Failed


"Thorsten Matzner" wrote in message
...
"Robert H. Risch" wrote:

Thanks for your help.


You are welcome. I do not know why this does not work correctly on
your computer, but maybe someone else has more experience with
altering this setting. I never used it because I do not run a server
here.

I also would like to know if there is any truth to the assertion,

"Changing the value of the key LargeSystemCache from 0 to 1 will tell
Windows XP to allocate all but 4MB of system memory to the file system
cache, basically meaning that the XP Kernel can run in memory, greatly
improving it's speed".

This doesn't seem to have anything to do with whether or not the machine is
used as a server.

RHR


  #6  
Old June 3rd 03, 11:16 PM
Thorsten Matzner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Performance Tweak that Failed

"Robert H. Risch" wrote:

I also would like to know if there is any truth to the assertion,

"Changing the value of the key LargeSystemCache from 0 to 1 will tell
Windows XP to allocate all but 4MB of system memory to the file system
cache, basically meaning that the XP Kernel can run in memory, greatly
improving it's speed".

This doesn't seem to have anything to do with whether or not the machine is
used as a server.


See if this can help you on:
"The LargeSystemCache Tuning Knob
Now that you understand what the one tuning parameter available does,
it seems appropriate to assess its usefulness. Under what
circumstances should you change the default setting of
LargeSystemCache? LargeSystemCache forces Windows 2000 to ignore the
system working set where the file cache resides and look elsewhere
when it needs to trim working sets. As described in the regentry.hlp
documentation file, setting LargeSystemCache to 1 sets the system
working set maximum in NT 4.0 to the size of RAM minus 4 MB--the
designated target for the size of the Available Bytes pool. In Windows
2000, the system's maximum working set size is set to 80% of the size
of real memory. Under the default value, when LargeSystemCache is set
to 0, the system working set maximum is set to approximately 8 MB in
both Windows 2000 and Windows NT. When set to 1, LargeSystemCache
preserves and protects the file cache, which is considered part of the
system working set, from page trimming. Turning the LargeSystemCache
on forces Windows 2000 to trim excess pages from other process working
sets.

In the context of configuring a large Windows 2000 file server,
setting LargeSystemCache to 1 may not be a bad idea. The regentry.hlp
documentation file explains that both the Maximize Throughput for File
Sharing and Maximize Throughput for Network Applications buttons set
the value of the file server Size parameter to 3, which sets a large
file server service working set. Presumably, the file Server service
running in services.exe issues an appropriate call to
SetProcessWorkingSetSize based on this Registry setting. In other
words, the working set of the file Server service running in
services.exe also must be protected from page trimming when the
LargeSystemCache option is enabled. Remember that the file Server
service uses the more efficient MDL Cache Manager Interface that
stores file data in RAM only once. Meanwhile, the file Server service
address space itself is also protected from excessive page trimming,
while the file cache is allowed to expand until it fills the remainder
of the system's memory.

The problem is any other applications running on the server. If you
are trying to configure a consolidated Windows 2000 Server running
more than file and print services and LargeSystemCache is set to 1,
the new behavior in Windows 2000 is to preserve 20% of RAM for other
applications (including the file Server service running inside
services.exe). If you are not careful, Windows 2000 may trim back the
working sets of other applications too much with the LargeSystemCache
setting in effect. Some applications may become slow and unresponsive
due to excessive page stealing directed at them. If file cache
activity heats up, there may be a noticeable delay when desktop
applications are swapped back into memory following a period of
inactivity. Due to high paging rates, any application that suffers a
hard page fault may encounter delays at the busy paging disk.

The fact that the file cache can map a maximum of 960 MB of RAM (or
512 MB in Windows NT) does establish an upper limit to the amount of
memory the file cache will use, even when LargeSystemCache is set to
1. This limit suggests that when you configure a very large server
with, say, 2 GB of RAM, setting the value of LargeSystemCache to 1
will not squeeze out other applications once the file cache grabs what
it can. A final consideration is that server applications like MS SQL
Server that make an explicit call to SetProcessWorkingSetSize to set
their working set minimum and maximum are afforded a measure of
protection from page trimming even when LargeSystemCache is set to 1.

This drastic behavior of the LargeSystemCache parameter was modified
in Windows 2000. Instead of increasing the system working set maximum
to the size of RAM minus 4 MB, turning on the LargeSystemCache in
Windows 2000 sets the system working set maximum to 80% of available
RAM. The intent of this change is to dampen the extreme behavior of
this tuning knob, making it easier for a system running with a
LargeSystemCache to run some other mission-critical applications
inside the same box. Unfortunately, reserving 20% of the remaining RAM
for other applications is a purely arbitrary partitioning of available
memory resources. It is not clear why the Windows 2000 developers are
not willing to accept the inevitable and provide a more flexible
tuning knob to specify the desired size of the file cache."

("Windows 2000 Performance Guide", ch. 7)

--
(tm)
  #7  
Old June 4th 03, 05:50 AM
Steve C.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Performance Tweak that Failed

A lot of people use this tweak, but personally I found it to slow the system
down.

The biggest difference I noticed with the LargeSystemCache setting ON (1),
is that copying large files seemed to strain the system so much that using
another program during the copy was difficult.

When it's off, I can copy lots of files and still do other things without
problem.

I've always wondered why people used this tweak, but that's just a potential
drawback for people to keep in mind.


"Robert H. Risch" wrote in message
...
I decided to try the "System Cache Boost" tweak, #9b at
http://datacreek.net/webgear/tips/xptweaks.html . It reads,

"Changing the value of the key LargeSystemCache from 0 to 1 will tell
Windows XP to allocate all but 4MB of system memory to the file system
cache, basically meaning that the XP Kernel can run in memory, greatly
improving it's speed. The 4MB of memory left is used for disk caching, but
if for any reason more is needed, XP allocates more. Generally, this tweak
improves performance by a fair bit but can, in some intensive

applications,
degrade performance. As with the above tweak, you should have at least

256MB
of RAM before attempting to enable LargeSystemCache".

Since I have 768MB of RAM, this seemed okay to try. When I rebooted, the
display was set to the lowest resolution and color depth and could not be
modified by using display properties. Also the following message popped
up,
"Error loading C:\Winnt\System32\NvCpl.dll. A dynamic link library (DLL)
initialization routine failed".

I had no trouble reverting my hard drive to the previous state but I am
curious to know why it didn't work. Has anybody else found that this

tweak
gives trouble? Thanks.

RHR




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.