Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for professional system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I want to move pagefile.sys from C: -HDD- to S: -SSD- on Hyper-V Core. I just upgraded RAM from 8GB to 16GB. 8GB was pretty enough. I also want to move guest OSes' pagefiles to SSD as .VHD format. Primary virtual Windows Server SBS has 6GB RAM and it's pagefile is 6GB too. At the end SSD will contain Hyper-V & and guest OSes' pagefiles. SSD can read/write up to 300MB/sn, average 80MB/sn.

Current Hyper-V pagefile is 8GB (RAM amount) and will be 16GB. I think 16GB is not necessary. Can I keep it as 8GB? And what you think about my idea; all paging files are in a SSD?

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 1 down vote accepted

If the host is mainly used to host virtual guests, then the actual use of the host page/swap file is greatly reduced as it is not desirable to swap running VMs onto page/swap memory. So... Yes, reducing the page/swap file on the host is fine.

SSD for page/swap file is definitely advantageous due to its speed over traditional mechanical devices.

share|improve this answer
    
You confirm my idea: Big pagefile for host is not necessary; since guests have their own dedicated pagefiles. –  Nime Cloud Aug 20 '11 at 16:44
    
Yup... Some of the other statements made of SSD and page/swap files are just baseless (as well as contradicting of themselves as well)... –  user48838 Aug 20 '11 at 17:16

You can set the paging file to whatever size you want (why not "system managed size"?), so if you know 16Gb is not necessary for your usage then you can keep it at 8Gb.

And what you think about my idea; all paging files are in a SSD?

Daft. SSDs are expensive and unreliable. Memory is cheap and a system with fewer components is more reliable.

share|improve this answer
    
Since when are enterprise SSDs "unreliable"? –  ErnieTheGeek Aug 19 '11 at 20:33
    
SSDs fail after a number of writes, generally RAM doesn't (not in the same way). RAM is older, more established technology in this kind of use. RAM has fewer components itself than SSDs have, and is connected through fewer subsystems (RAM -> Socket -> Northbridge, versus Flash -> controller+wear leveller -> SAS/SATA controller -> socket -> cable -> socket -> Southbridge -> Northbridge). I have no citations to studies, but that doesn't mean this isn't evidence. –  TessellatingHeckler Aug 19 '11 at 20:48
    
Reliability is not problem, is it? These are only paging files. HDD needs to take a breathe with the help of SSD. I'm currently using an SSD as dedicated physical disk to put pagefile.sys of primary guest OS. It seems work. I also do the same at my personnel PC at the office. 6GB (paged)RAM usage on XP 32bit is still quite fast. I can't do that with pagefile on HDD. –  Nime Cloud Aug 19 '11 at 20:51
    
@TessellatinHeckler - I think you might want to reevaluate your position on Enterprise class SSDs. They offer a lot more performance/reliability than you're giving them credit for. –  ErnieTheGeek Aug 19 '11 at 21:06
1  
Here's a nice write up, even updated in June by @sysadmin1138 serverfault.com/questions/14189/reliability-of-ssd-drives –  Nixphoe Aug 19 '11 at 21:19

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.