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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Strange loss of system resources
On 07 Jan 2009 21:29:19 GMT, thanatoid put
finger to keyboard and composed: I use Opera and I have started using FireFox 2.0.0.18 because Opera crashes a lot with the stupid SWF plugin, although I still prefer its features and I am very accustomed to it. If I stay off the web, no problem with sys resources. Does anyone have any idea WHY this has started happening and what I can do to fix it? Any help would be most appreciated, as usual. t. Opera 9.5x has had severe bugs involving system resources. I don't know about Firefox, though. http://groups.google.com/group/opera...a?dmode=source http://groups.google.com/group/opera...e?dmode=source I'm still using Opera 9.27 without too many problems, although I have disabled SWF. - Franc Zabkar -- Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Strange loss of system resources
thanatoid wrote: "Buffalo" wrote in : Perhaps one of the Win98 Gurus will have an explanation. Most of them are not speaking to me since I use 98SE LITE. Satan's spawn! Did you have FireFox when you only had 256MB? No, I only installed it because some stupid eBay box wasn't showing up in Opera (I still think Opera is better, I HATE the FF cache system with no extensions - although it does save FLV's just as nicely as Opera). But the same thing was happening when I just used Opera. I guess now that I have 1GB of RAM, an ADSL connection and a 2GHz CPU I have been forgetting about my favorite browser, OffByOne, which has NO cache and takes up virtually no resources. My bad. OTOH, I have been forced to use Opera or FF because I have been forced to access sites which use Java, Flash, etc. Time to put a stop to that. I wish eBay worked in OB1. SNIP While working offline, turn your anti-virus off. I ONLY ever do on-demand scans of the directory where I've dl'd stuff which could be potentially harmful. NOTHING related to the AV (ESET NOD32) is running otherwise. Not even the Kernel or control center. (Process of elimination) Does your anti-virus automatically check for updates? That could be using system resources also??? Just guessing. No, I don't let my computer do ANYTHING automatically. SNIP If I hear of a program that tracks the use of system resources, I will post back. (use and which program uses them) I Googled some more yesterday and found something interesting. While there appears to be NO way of freeing up the stupid 64KB of sys resources allocation, there is a registry entry which MAY help, although it has to do with unloading DLL's - but it was mentioned in a sys resources thread somewhere. I haven't gotten around to putting it in yet. FYI, it's: Use Regedit to edit: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curr entVersion\exp lorer Add the DWORD value named: AlwaysUnloadDLL and set it to 1 It seems to be fairly useless for 2000 and up but some in the thread said it's good in 9x. But yesterday I did OK. It's really not a big deal, just a little annoying, and it doesn't happen ALL the time. Thanks again for your help. t. I found this : http://support.microsoft.com/kb/300059 Perhaps doing the troubleshooting mentioned in the middle of the paragraph below may give some insight. I couldn't find much else. "How to Use the System Resource Meter Tool You can use the System Resource Meter tool by using either of the following methods: a.. Click Start, click Run, type: rsrcmtr.exe, and then click OK. a.. Click Start, point to Programs, point to Accessories, point to System Tools, and then click Resource Meter. When you run the System Resource Meter tool, an icon is placed in the system tray. You can double-click the icon to open a window that displays the percentage of free resources for the system, user, and GDI resources. Record the amount of available system resources that you have before you start a program, and then record the amount of available resources while you are running the program. Then, record the amount of the available resources after you close the program. If you open a program and it consumes system resources that change the color of your system tray icon to yellow or red, the program is consuming a high percentage of your system resources. You can attempt to run your computer in a clean-boot operation, run the System Resource Meter tool, and then run that particular program to determine if it is that program or if it is a combination of programs running on your computer that create this problem. For additional information about how to clean boot your computer, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base: 267288 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/267288/EN-US/ ) How to Perform a Clean Boot in Windows Millennium Edition 192926 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/192926/EN-US/ ) How to Perform Clean-Boot Troubleshooting for Windows 98 " |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Strange loss of system resources
thanatoid wrote:
| Hi gang. | | Something a little strange is happening. | | I am running 98SELite on a 2GHz machine with 1GB of RAM. I have | the following lines in system.ini and everything runs fine | (but... see later): | | [vcache] | MinFileCache=0 | MaxFileCache=524288 That should be fine. | (another section) | MinPagingFileSize=204800 | MaxPagingFileSize=204800 Setting a max size for the swap file could get you in deep trouble with certain MVPs! Better not let Harper see this in particular! However, I doubt it affects resources. | (I haven't used ANY of the swap file since I put in the 1GB RAM If the swap file isn't being used very often, consider... "ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1" ....in System.ini, [386.Enh] Section. But I'm not sure it has anything to do with resources. And I can't quite recall what it is supposed to do! Maybe it reverts swap file handling back to Win95 methods, which I think spent less time anticipating the size to make the swap file. This is probably what you want to do-- instead of setting the max/min to the same number! | :-) | | Here's the weirdness: | | I seem to be running out of system resources all the time and | quite rapidly - much more so than when I still had just 256 MB | of RAM. After about ½ hr on the web, I get to about 20% on the | 1st and 3rd resource and sometimes I have to reboot a few | minutes later. Does it happen just by connecting to the WEB (i.e., you've clicked your connectoid, thanatoid)-- or do you have to do something like NG activity, browsing, or downloading? Maybe... Do you have "System Monitor" in START... System Tools? If not, get it from "START, Settings, Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs, Windows Setup tab, D-Clk System Tools, check System Monitor, OK, Apply, OK". May as well take "Resource Meter", too. Now, go through the menus and at least have it display (a) Swap file in use. (b) Swap file size. (c) Swappable memory. (d) Unused physical memory. (e) Allocated memory. (f) Disk cache size. (g) Locked memory (h) Other memory (i) Kernel Processor Usage (j) Kernel Threads Keep an eye especially on Swap File in Use & Disk Cache Size before/after the problem begins. | I use Opera and I have started using FireFox 2.0.0.18 because | Opera crashes a lot with the stupid SWF plugin, although I still | prefer its features and I am very accustomed to it. | | If I stay off the web, no problem with sys resources. | | Does anyone have any idea WHY this has started happening and | what I can do to fix it? | Any help would be most appreciated, as usual. Here is what I always post about resources... Generally, if you've got any Resources at all, you've got enough (said Harper or Martell). This is because it won't blow, until Resources are zero. Then, you get an out of memory error (no matter how much RAM you've got). Perhaps put Resource Meter in your Tray, to see how low they get. A reboot would clear it, but, obviously, it's better to cleanup your Startup Group. Do you have "Resource Meter" in START... System Tools? If not, get it from "START, Settings, Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs, Windows Setup tab, D-Clk System Tools, check System Resource Meter, OK, Apply, OK". May as well take "System Monitor", too. The meter will show three figures: System, User & GDI. System is set to the lower of the others. GDI, I take to be the province of one's Display Adapter & out of one's control, except by prayer maybe. I know my GDI resources went up after switching to an LSD monitor. User Resources can be controlled by limiting the number of programs running. http://www.pcmag.com/ 's StartUpCop has "undo", and it is more than a combination of "START, Run, MSInfo32, Software Environment, Startup Programs" and "START, Run, MSConfig, Startup tab". It can even do a permanent delete from the Startup Group. This is configurable, and one may maintain multiple configurations of items to include in the Group. Resources are starting to make me as crazy as TIFs now. I don't fully understand it, my book ("Windows 98 Secrets" [Livingston/Straub]), pp.1126-1127, says, Resources are lists (aka heaps). "The lists point to areas of memory where user interface elements (and other items) are stored -- things like dialog boxes, windows, and so on." From that, I divine these are lists of POINTERS to locations in RAM. These lists have a maximum size, and when they are used up, your resources are gone. Windows generates an out of memory message upon the next request that needs space in a list. Even if you have plenty of RAM, the list won't get any longer. Even though each entry in the 32-bit heap can address an area of RAM 2 GB away, that also doesn't make the list any longer. I just don't know how long that list is; the book didn't say. And that's as close as I've come to understanding Resources. Windows 3.1x had four 16-bit heaps, three for the User resource & one for the GDI (Graphic Device Interface). These could only address 64K each or 256K in total, "to store the objects used in the user interface and displayed on your screen". In Windows 95/98 the three User heaps have been combined to one 32-bit heap, capable of addressing 2GB of RAM. Because some 3.1x applications managed resources lists directly, instead of through APIs (application program interfaces), Microsoft retained the 16-bit GDI heap. But some of the elements in it were moved to the 32-bit heap. Then follows a table of ten Resources elements and the limits to them in Windows 3.1x compared to Windows 95/98. I see no contradiction to Livingston/Straub in the article "Core System Components", on the Windows 98 Resource Kit. | t. -- Thanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Strange loss of system resources
thanatoid wrote:
| Hi gang. | | Something a little strange is happening. | | I am running 98SELite on a 2GHz machine with 1GB of RAM. I have | the following lines in system.ini and everything runs fine | (but... see later): | | [vcache] | MinFileCache=0 | MaxFileCache=524288 That should be fine. | (another section) | MinPagingFileSize=204800 | MaxPagingFileSize=204800 Setting a max size for the swap file could get you in deep trouble with certain MVPs! Better not let Harper see this in particular! However, I doubt it affects resources. | (I haven't used ANY of the swap file since I put in the 1GB RAM If the swap file isn't being used very often, consider... "ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1" ....in System.ini, [386.Enh] Section. But I'm not sure it has anything to do with resources. And I can't quite recall what it is supposed to do! Maybe it reverts swap file handling back to Win95 methods, which I think spent less time anticipating the size to make the swap file. This is probably what you want to do-- instead of setting the max/min to the same number! | :-) | | Here's the weirdness: | | I seem to be running out of system resources all the time and | quite rapidly - much more so than when I still had just 256 MB | of RAM. After about ½ hr on the web, I get to about 20% on the | 1st and 3rd resource and sometimes I have to reboot a few | minutes later. Does it happen just by connecting to the WEB (i.e., you've clicked your connectoid, thanatoid)-- or do you have to do something like NG activity, browsing, or downloading? Maybe... Do you have "System Monitor" in START... System Tools? If not, get it from "START, Settings, Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs, Windows Setup tab, D-Clk System Tools, check System Monitor, OK, Apply, OK". May as well take "Resource Meter", too. Now, go through the menus and at least have it display (a) Swap file in use. (b) Swap file size. (c) Swappable memory. (d) Unused physical memory. (e) Allocated memory. (f) Disk cache size. (g) Locked memory (h) Other memory (i) Kernel Processor Usage (j) Kernel Threads Keep an eye especially on Swap File in Use & Disk Cache Size before/after the problem begins. | I use Opera and I have started using FireFox 2.0.0.18 because | Opera crashes a lot with the stupid SWF plugin, although I still | prefer its features and I am very accustomed to it. | | If I stay off the web, no problem with sys resources. | | Does anyone have any idea WHY this has started happening and | what I can do to fix it? | Any help would be most appreciated, as usual. Here is what I always post about resources... Generally, if you've got any Resources at all, you've got enough (said Harper or Martell). This is because it won't blow, until Resources are zero. Then, you get an out of memory error (no matter how much RAM you've got). Perhaps put Resource Meter in your Tray, to see how low they get. A reboot would clear it, but, obviously, it's better to cleanup your Startup Group. Do you have "Resource Meter" in START... System Tools? If not, get it from "START, Settings, Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs, Windows Setup tab, D-Clk System Tools, check System Resource Meter, OK, Apply, OK". May as well take "System Monitor", too. The meter will show three figures: System, User & GDI. System is set to the lower of the others. GDI, I take to be the province of one's Display Adapter & out of one's control, except by prayer maybe. I know my GDI resources went up after switching to an LSD monitor. User Resources can be controlled by limiting the number of programs running. http://www.pcmag.com/ 's StartUpCop has "undo", and it is more than a combination of "START, Run, MSInfo32, Software Environment, Startup Programs" and "START, Run, MSConfig, Startup tab". It can even do a permanent delete from the Startup Group. This is configurable, and one may maintain multiple configurations of items to include in the Group. Resources are starting to make me as crazy as TIFs now. I don't fully understand it, my book ("Windows 98 Secrets" [Livingston/Straub]), pp.1126-1127, says, Resources are lists (aka heaps). "The lists point to areas of memory where user interface elements (and other items) are stored -- things like dialog boxes, windows, and so on." From that, I divine these are lists of POINTERS to locations in RAM. These lists have a maximum size, and when they are used up, your resources are gone. Windows generates an out of memory message upon the next request that needs space in a list. Even if you have plenty of RAM, the list won't get any longer. Even though each entry in the 32-bit heap can address an area of RAM 2 GB away, that also doesn't make the list any longer. I just don't know how long that list is; the book didn't say. And that's as close as I've come to understanding Resources. Windows 3.1x had four 16-bit heaps, three for the User resource & one for the GDI (Graphic Device Interface). These could only address 64K each or 256K in total, "to store the objects used in the user interface and displayed on your screen". In Windows 95/98 the three User heaps have been combined to one 32-bit heap, capable of addressing 2GB of RAM. Because some 3.1x applications managed resources lists directly, instead of through APIs (application program interfaces), Microsoft retained the 16-bit GDI heap. But some of the elements in it were moved to the 32-bit heap. Then follows a table of ten Resources elements and the limits to them in Windows 3.1x compared to Windows 95/98. I see no contradiction to Livingston/Straub in the article "Core System Components", on the Windows 98 Resource Kit. | t. -- Thanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Strange loss of system resources
"Buffalo" wrote in
: SNIP I found this : http://support.microsoft.com/kb/300059 Perhaps doing the troubleshooting mentioned in the middle of the paragraph below may give some insight. I couldn't find much else. SNIP Well, it's certainly very nice of you to look up stuff like that for someone, thank you. I am aware of using that (or another monitoring) program and checking resources (or RAM) use by programs one by one and finding the ugly beast causing the problems, but to tell you the honest truth, I am just /too damn lazy/ to go through the process. If I got crashes every 3 minutes I might, but basically everything runs actually better than it should. Thanks again. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Strange loss of system resources
"Buffalo" wrote in
: SNIP I found this : http://support.microsoft.com/kb/300059 Perhaps doing the troubleshooting mentioned in the middle of the paragraph below may give some insight. I couldn't find much else. SNIP Well, it's certainly very nice of you to look up stuff like that for someone, thank you. I am aware of using that (or another monitoring) program and checking resources (or RAM) use by programs one by one and finding the ugly beast causing the problems, but to tell you the honest truth, I am just /too damn lazy/ to go through the process. If I got crashes every 3 minutes I might, but basically everything runs actually better than it should. Thanks again. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Strange loss of system resources
Franc Zabkar wrote in
: SNIP Opera 9.5x has had severe bugs involving system resources. I don't know about Firefox, though. http://groups.google.com/group/opera...sg/ea2c64185e3 837ea?dmode=source http://groups.google.com/group/opera...sg/ac3c0109a6d e43de?dmode=source I'm still using Opera 9.27 without too many problems, although I have disabled SWF. Nice to hear from you again, Franc, I hope you've been well. Yes, I have noticed that even when I was using 7.23 it caused a lot of RAM loss. The same thing seems to happen now, I am using ver. 8.01. I thought about using 9.* but now I am actually thinking about going back to 7.23. I still think Opera is the best-designed browser from the user's customizing/flexibility (does ANY other browser have a zoom function? IE doesn't count, just in case IT does! :-) viewpoint but it does seem to suffer from some bad coding. The SFW plugins have always crashed it, and other things too. It does have the nice "come back to where you were" restart feature (but it usually just immediately crashes again!) and it does eat a lot of resources. I really dislike some of the FFox "features" (or lack of them) but OTOH, Opera 8.01 doesn't have "save page with images" as 7.23 did! In fact I tried 7.54 as well and IT was VERY different from 7.23 as well. I find it really peculiar that they change the appearance and options and functionality so much... Some day I might try 5.12... When it's a slow day... But next time I do an Acronis restore, I think I'll reinstall 7.23. As much as I /really/ hate having THREE browsers when ONE should be enough, FFox does swf/flv very nicely. But its structural/directory design is MOST unpleasant. And the fact you have to use THE MOUSE to go back or forward is just ///unbelievable///. Regards. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Strange loss of system resources
Franc Zabkar wrote in
: SNIP Opera 9.5x has had severe bugs involving system resources. I don't know about Firefox, though. http://groups.google.com/group/opera...sg/ea2c64185e3 837ea?dmode=source http://groups.google.com/group/opera...sg/ac3c0109a6d e43de?dmode=source I'm still using Opera 9.27 without too many problems, although I have disabled SWF. Nice to hear from you again, Franc, I hope you've been well. Yes, I have noticed that even when I was using 7.23 it caused a lot of RAM loss. The same thing seems to happen now, I am using ver. 8.01. I thought about using 9.* but now I am actually thinking about going back to 7.23. I still think Opera is the best-designed browser from the user's customizing/flexibility (does ANY other browser have a zoom function? IE doesn't count, just in case IT does! :-) viewpoint but it does seem to suffer from some bad coding. The SFW plugins have always crashed it, and other things too. It does have the nice "come back to where you were" restart feature (but it usually just immediately crashes again!) and it does eat a lot of resources. I really dislike some of the FFox "features" (or lack of them) but OTOH, Opera 8.01 doesn't have "save page with images" as 7.23 did! In fact I tried 7.54 as well and IT was VERY different from 7.23 as well. I find it really peculiar that they change the appearance and options and functionality so much... Some day I might try 5.12... When it's a slow day... But next time I do an Acronis restore, I think I'll reinstall 7.23. As much as I /really/ hate having THREE browsers when ONE should be enough, FFox does swf/flv very nicely. But its structural/directory design is MOST unpleasant. And the fact you have to use THE MOUSE to go back or forward is just ///unbelievable///. Regards. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Strange loss of system resources
"PCR" wrote in
: Top-posted intro: WOW... Thanks for such a comprehensive reply. Really nice of you. thanatoid wrote: | Hi gang. | | Something a little strange is happening. | | I am running 98SELite on a 2GHz machine with 1GB of RAM. I | have the following lines in system.ini and everything runs | fine (but... see later): | | [vcache] | MinFileCache=0 | MaxFileCache=524288 That should be fine. | (another section) | MinPagingFileSize=204800 | MaxPagingFileSize=204800 Setting a max size for the swap file could get you in deep trouble with certain MVPs! Better not let Harper see this in particular! However, I doubt it affects resources. No, it doesn't, I was just describing the sys setup. The damn resources have 64K and that's that. And apparently NO program (except Ctl-Alt-Del) to free them up. SIGH. | (I haven't used ANY of the swap file since I put in the | 1GB RAM If the swap file isn't being used very often, consider... "ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1" ...in System.ini, [386.Enh] Section. I have that line in there but I didn't think it was worth mentioning. I don't know if THAT accounts for the swap file not being used at all, or whether it's the 1GB of RAM, but whatever. But I'm not sure it has anything to do with resources. And I can't quite recall what it is supposed to do! Maybe it reverts swap file handling back to Win95 methods, which I think spent less time anticipating the size to make the swap file. This is probably what you want to do-- instead of setting the max/min to the same number! I don't know. I've had the swap file set to min=max, about 2.5 (this time it's just 200MB since nothing ever uses it anyway :-) , ever since 1998 or so. Hard to get rid of some habits. And EVERYBODY having a different opinion on the RIGHT way to set it up doesn't help either! | Here's the weirdness: | | I seem to be running out of system resources all the time | and quite rapidly - much more so than when I still had | just 256 MB of RAM. After about ½ hr on the web, I get to | about 20% on the 1st and 3rd resource and sometimes I have | to reboot a few minutes later. Does it happen just by connecting to the WEB (i.e., you've clicked your connectoid, thanatoid)-- or do you have to do something like NG activity, browsing, or downloading? Maybe... No, only the web, which is why after "sleeping" on it I have decided that it must be the Opera and FFox browsers... See my reply to Franc for more musings on browsers... Do you have "System Monitor" in START... System Tools? If not, get it from "START, Settings, Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs, Windows Setup tab, D-Clk System Tools, check System Monitor, OK, Apply, OK". May as well take "Resource Meter", too. Now, go through the menus and at least have it display (a) Swap file in use. (b) Swap file size. (c) Swappable memory. (d) Unused physical memory. (e) Allocated memory. (f) Disk cache size. (g) Locked memory (h) Other memory (i) Kernel Processor Usage (j) Kernel Threads Keep an eye especially on Swap File in Use & Disk Cache Size before/after the problem begins. I feel /terrible/ saying this after you went to so much trouble describing the procedure, but I don't think I can muster up the patience to go through such a process. Also, I have played with System Monitor and I find it 50% mystifying and 50% annoying. I just LOVE it when you click the ? on "page discards" and it tells you "shows page discards", or something. How f*g helpful. So I have basically decided to forget about its existence. SNIP Here is what I always post about resources... Generally, if you've got any Resources at all, you've got enough (said Harper or Martell). This is because it won't blow, until Resources are zero. Then, you get an out of memory error (no matter how much RAM you've got). Yes, I sort of knew that and I read more about it as well. I have one of many technicians' favorite tools, a RAM MANAGER!!! The one I use on this machine is FreeRAM XP Pro 1.40. It's free, and works on 9x-XP. (Maybe Vista, although WHO CARES ;-) Leaving aside the endless discussion of whether its basic functionality is of /any/ use to anyone whatsoever, it does have ONE feature which I think /anyone/ will agree is useful... You can set it to warn you when the damn System Resources fall below a certain percentage. In fact, that's the only reason I know that's what's been happening, other than system fonts all over the screen and no icons within the Alt-Tab switching... Perhaps put Resource Meter in your Tray, to see how low they get. A reboot would clear it, but, obviously, it's better to cleanup your Startup Group. Do you have "Resource Meter" in START... System Tools? If not, get it from "START, Settings, Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs, Windows Setup tab, D-Clk System Tools, check System Resource Meter, OK, Apply, OK". May as well take "System Monitor", too. Aarggh! ;-) Right now FreeRAM XP is telling me I have 65%, 65%, and 77%. Not bad. I have XNews running, Firefox is loaded but I haven't gotten around to going to a site with it yet (trying to find the link as I write this!). Not bad. (A little later, I have 2 FFox windows open in addition to above, and I am at 56%, 56%, 69%. Still not bad. There were NO images to speak of on any of the pages I have gone through.) The meter will show three figures: System, User & GDI. System is set to the lower of the others. GDI, I take to be the province of one's Display Adapter & out of one's control, except by prayer maybe. I know my GDI resources went up after switching to an LSD ahem... monitor. Very interesting,. Another argument for my arsenal of anti-LCD monitor information. Then again, everybody uses XP and Vista, so... User Resources can be controlled by limiting the number of programs running. http://www.pcmag.com/ 's StartUpCop has "undo", and it is more than a combination of "START, Run, MSInfo32, Software Environment, Startup Programs" and "START, Run, MSConfig, Startup tab". It can even do a permanent delete from the Startup Group. This is configurable, and one may maintain multiple configurations of items to include in the Group. I use IARSN's TaskInfo 2000, and have been for years. The freeware version is better than the paid version! Anyway, it's great at showing RAM used and dozens of other things, and it will also kill programs that don't show up or won't die with TaskManager. For startup, I have StartUp Changer 2000, and my startup is VERY conservative. After a boot up, doing nothing, I have 80-90& (I forget exactly) in all 3 Sys Resources. Resources are starting to make me as crazy as TIFs now. I don't fully understand it, my book ("Windows 98 Secrets" [Livingston/Straub]), pp.1126-1127, says, Resources are lists (aka heaps). "The lists point to areas of memory where user interface elements (and other items) are stored -- things like dialog boxes, windows, and so on." From that, I divine these are lists of POINTERS to locations in RAM. These lists have a maximum size, and when they are used up, your resources are gone. Windows generates an out of memory message upon the next request that needs space in a list. Even if you have plenty of RAM, the list won't get any longer. Even though each entry in the 32-bit heap can address an area of RAM 2 GB away, that also doesn't make the list any longer. I just don't know how long that list is; the book didn't say. And that's as close as I've come to understanding Resources. Yes, I love these explanations. /Generally/ speaking, I have found that if you read something incomprehensible over again, it makes a little more sense every time - I found this with literature as well as technical stuff. So If I read the above 5 times I( would probably understand it. Windows 3.1x had four 16-bit heaps, three for the User resource & one for the GDI (Graphic Device Interface). These could only address 64K each or 256K in total, "to store the objects used in the user interface and displayed on your screen". In Windows 95/98 the three User heaps have been combined to one 32-bit heap, capable of addressing 2GB of RAM. Because some 3.1x applications managed resources lists directly, instead of through APIs (application program interfaces), Microsoft retained the 16-bit GDI heap. But some of the elements in it were moved to the 32-bit heap. Then follows a table of ten Resources elements and the limits to them in Windows 3.1x compared to Windows 95/98. I see no contradiction to Livingston/Straub in the article "Core System Components", on the Windows 98 Resource Kit. Where's my Advil bottle... Thanks again! t. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Strange loss of system resources
"PCR" wrote in
: Top-posted intro: WOW... Thanks for such a comprehensive reply. Really nice of you. thanatoid wrote: | Hi gang. | | Something a little strange is happening. | | I am running 98SELite on a 2GHz machine with 1GB of RAM. I | have the following lines in system.ini and everything runs | fine (but... see later): | | [vcache] | MinFileCache=0 | MaxFileCache=524288 That should be fine. | (another section) | MinPagingFileSize=204800 | MaxPagingFileSize=204800 Setting a max size for the swap file could get you in deep trouble with certain MVPs! Better not let Harper see this in particular! However, I doubt it affects resources. No, it doesn't, I was just describing the sys setup. The damn resources have 64K and that's that. And apparently NO program (except Ctl-Alt-Del) to free them up. SIGH. | (I haven't used ANY of the swap file since I put in the | 1GB RAM If the swap file isn't being used very often, consider... "ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1" ...in System.ini, [386.Enh] Section. I have that line in there but I didn't think it was worth mentioning. I don't know if THAT accounts for the swap file not being used at all, or whether it's the 1GB of RAM, but whatever. But I'm not sure it has anything to do with resources. And I can't quite recall what it is supposed to do! Maybe it reverts swap file handling back to Win95 methods, which I think spent less time anticipating the size to make the swap file. This is probably what you want to do-- instead of setting the max/min to the same number! I don't know. I've had the swap file set to min=max, about 2.5 (this time it's just 200MB since nothing ever uses it anyway :-) , ever since 1998 or so. Hard to get rid of some habits. And EVERYBODY having a different opinion on the RIGHT way to set it up doesn't help either! | Here's the weirdness: | | I seem to be running out of system resources all the time | and quite rapidly - much more so than when I still had | just 256 MB of RAM. After about ½ hr on the web, I get to | about 20% on the 1st and 3rd resource and sometimes I have | to reboot a few minutes later. Does it happen just by connecting to the WEB (i.e., you've clicked your connectoid, thanatoid)-- or do you have to do something like NG activity, browsing, or downloading? Maybe... No, only the web, which is why after "sleeping" on it I have decided that it must be the Opera and FFox browsers... See my reply to Franc for more musings on browsers... Do you have "System Monitor" in START... System Tools? If not, get it from "START, Settings, Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs, Windows Setup tab, D-Clk System Tools, check System Monitor, OK, Apply, OK". May as well take "Resource Meter", too. Now, go through the menus and at least have it display (a) Swap file in use. (b) Swap file size. (c) Swappable memory. (d) Unused physical memory. (e) Allocated memory. (f) Disk cache size. (g) Locked memory (h) Other memory (i) Kernel Processor Usage (j) Kernel Threads Keep an eye especially on Swap File in Use & Disk Cache Size before/after the problem begins. I feel /terrible/ saying this after you went to so much trouble describing the procedure, but I don't think I can muster up the patience to go through such a process. Also, I have played with System Monitor and I find it 50% mystifying and 50% annoying. I just LOVE it when you click the ? on "page discards" and it tells you "shows page discards", or something. How f*g helpful. So I have basically decided to forget about its existence. SNIP Here is what I always post about resources... Generally, if you've got any Resources at all, you've got enough (said Harper or Martell). This is because it won't blow, until Resources are zero. Then, you get an out of memory error (no matter how much RAM you've got). Yes, I sort of knew that and I read more about it as well. I have one of many technicians' favorite tools, a RAM MANAGER!!! The one I use on this machine is FreeRAM XP Pro 1.40. It's free, and works on 9x-XP. (Maybe Vista, although WHO CARES ;-) Leaving aside the endless discussion of whether its basic functionality is of /any/ use to anyone whatsoever, it does have ONE feature which I think /anyone/ will agree is useful... You can set it to warn you when the damn System Resources fall below a certain percentage. In fact, that's the only reason I know that's what's been happening, other than system fonts all over the screen and no icons within the Alt-Tab switching... Perhaps put Resource Meter in your Tray, to see how low they get. A reboot would clear it, but, obviously, it's better to cleanup your Startup Group. Do you have "Resource Meter" in START... System Tools? If not, get it from "START, Settings, Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs, Windows Setup tab, D-Clk System Tools, check System Resource Meter, OK, Apply, OK". May as well take "System Monitor", too. Aarggh! ;-) Right now FreeRAM XP is telling me I have 65%, 65%, and 77%. Not bad. I have XNews running, Firefox is loaded but I haven't gotten around to going to a site with it yet (trying to find the link as I write this!). Not bad. (A little later, I have 2 FFox windows open in addition to above, and I am at 56%, 56%, 69%. Still not bad. There were NO images to speak of on any of the pages I have gone through.) The meter will show three figures: System, User & GDI. System is set to the lower of the others. GDI, I take to be the province of one's Display Adapter & out of one's control, except by prayer maybe. I know my GDI resources went up after switching to an LSD ahem... monitor. Very interesting,. Another argument for my arsenal of anti-LCD monitor information. Then again, everybody uses XP and Vista, so... User Resources can be controlled by limiting the number of programs running. http://www.pcmag.com/ 's StartUpCop has "undo", and it is more than a combination of "START, Run, MSInfo32, Software Environment, Startup Programs" and "START, Run, MSConfig, Startup tab". It can even do a permanent delete from the Startup Group. This is configurable, and one may maintain multiple configurations of items to include in the Group. I use IARSN's TaskInfo 2000, and have been for years. The freeware version is better than the paid version! Anyway, it's great at showing RAM used and dozens of other things, and it will also kill programs that don't show up or won't die with TaskManager. For startup, I have StartUp Changer 2000, and my startup is VERY conservative. After a boot up, doing nothing, I have 80-90& (I forget exactly) in all 3 Sys Resources. Resources are starting to make me as crazy as TIFs now. I don't fully understand it, my book ("Windows 98 Secrets" [Livingston/Straub]), pp.1126-1127, says, Resources are lists (aka heaps). "The lists point to areas of memory where user interface elements (and other items) are stored -- things like dialog boxes, windows, and so on." From that, I divine these are lists of POINTERS to locations in RAM. These lists have a maximum size, and when they are used up, your resources are gone. Windows generates an out of memory message upon the next request that needs space in a list. Even if you have plenty of RAM, the list won't get any longer. Even though each entry in the 32-bit heap can address an area of RAM 2 GB away, that also doesn't make the list any longer. I just don't know how long that list is; the book didn't say. And that's as close as I've come to understanding Resources. Yes, I love these explanations. /Generally/ speaking, I have found that if you read something incomprehensible over again, it makes a little more sense every time - I found this with literature as well as technical stuff. So If I read the above 5 times I( would probably understand it. Windows 3.1x had four 16-bit heaps, three for the User resource & one for the GDI (Graphic Device Interface). These could only address 64K each or 256K in total, "to store the objects used in the user interface and displayed on your screen". In Windows 95/98 the three User heaps have been combined to one 32-bit heap, capable of addressing 2GB of RAM. Because some 3.1x applications managed resources lists directly, instead of through APIs (application program interfaces), Microsoft retained the 16-bit GDI heap. But some of the elements in it were moved to the 32-bit heap. Then follows a table of ten Resources elements and the limits to them in Windows 3.1x compared to Windows 95/98. I see no contradiction to Livingston/Straub in the article "Core System Components", on the Windows 98 Resource Kit. Where's my Advil bottle... Thanks again! t. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Strange loss of system resources | thanatoid | General | 62 | January 13th 09 05:23 AM |
Loss of system fonts | Fred | Setup & Installation | 6 | January 12th 06 03:48 AM |
Loss of resources | Chas | General | 3 | December 5th 04 11:22 PM |
low system memory and low system resources | pamela | Setup & Installation | 1 | June 27th 04 05:47 AM |
System Resources | April | General | 8 | June 27th 04 12:41 AM |