Ron Parker wrote:

> On Wed, 26 May 1999 08:51:05 -0700, Jon A. Cruz wrote:
> >Argh!
> >One year ago I had checked it out on a system with only 32MB (pretty decent at the
> >time). Just opening Word (not any docs, just Word) caused it to begin almost
> >constant disk-thrashing. I had hoped they had corrected that. Guess not. Good to
> >know what practical requirements are (remember Win95 saying '8MB'??? Yeah, right)
>
> If I shut down all my optional services (apache, rc5des) and everything else,
> the base system takes up somewhere around 75M, according to Task Manager.
> Kernel memory alone is about half that.  So it looks like 96M is a minimal
> system for this version of NT.  Disclaimers: I'm not running the official
> beta 3, but I'm only about 15 builds behind.  I'm also running some under-
> development dlls and drivers that will push the total up a bit.  But, as
> you say, we're way off topic here.

One of the things I've heard about MS OS's is that they use whatever physical memory
you have. That is, if you have the memory, the OS will go ahead and utilize it untill
some apps need it, then get paged out. The real test seems to be what is the point
that it starts excessive swapping.

Post a reply to this message