Slashdot Mirror
Comprehensive Guide to the Windows Paging File
busfahrer writes "Adrian's Rojak Pot has a nice article about the internals of the Windows paging file. It explains what a paging file is and lists the differences between a swapfile and a paging file. But first and foremost, a large part of the article deals with the various methods of optimizing the Windows paging file, thus yielding a notable performance gain for people who are not overly blessed with RAM."
I have been waiting for something of this magnitude forever! This has greatly enhanced my understanding of the computing world, my value add to my employer, and I am no longer impotent!!!
Hooray for the paging file!!
Who let the authors out?
1337, 1337, 1337
Who let the authors out?
l33t,l33t,l33t!!
Wow. Three comments into it, and you're already playing the "Microsoft Sucks - Linux Rules" card.
You know what would be witty? In future posts, whenever you spell Microsoft, you and your razor sharp wit replace the "s" in Microsoft with a dollar sign. Take that Bill!
JESUS SAVE HER!
What are you talking about?! Men never have admin privs on a woman's box.
Tell that to the pro-lifers. They seem to forget sometimes.
Tell that to the pro-lifers. They seem to forget sometimes.
That's bullshit. We pro-life people aren't trying to take away "reproductive rights" or any nonsense like that.
My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins, and a woman's right to "admin" her "box" ends where her unborn child begins.
Liberals are funny... you're all hardcore against the death penalty, except for the "crime" of being conceived at an inconvenient time.
If women want to choose to not be preganant, that's all well and good. But the time to make that choice is prior to getting knocked up. Most of us learned, during our transitions from childhood to adulthood, that choices carry risks and have consequences...
If you want to kill yourself, that's YOUR choice. Not your mom's.
you wrote:"If you want to kill yourself, that's YOUR choice. Not your mom's." Like Terry Schiavo eh?
That's bullshit. We pro-life people aren't trying to take away "reproductive rights" or any nonsense like that.
Uh huh...
My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins, and a woman's right to "admin" her "box" ends where her unborn child begins.
Define 'unborn child.' Most Republicans use this term to refer even to fetuses of any stage.
I define an unborn child as a fetus at the point where it can be removed from a woman and live. Before that, it is a parasitic tissue and the host should have full control over it.
Liberals are funny... you're all hardcore against the death penalty, except for the "crime" of being conceived at an inconvenient time.
Republicans are funny... they claim to want smaller government, until it comes to our private lives.
Democrats are funny... they claim to want larger government, until it comes to our private lives.
Both sides should live their lives and not worry so much about everyone else's lives.
If you want to kill yourself, that's YOUR choice. Not your mom's.
Wow, poor time to bring this up Mr. Conservative, as your party sides with the delusional parents of Terry Schiavo and decimates her wishes to let her body die long after her mind and soul already has.
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
I define an unborn child as a fetus at the point where it can be removed from a woman and live. Before that, it is a parasitic tissue and the host should have full control over it.
That is an absurdly bad definition. There is not set time for any given fetus/baby. Some babies can be born extremely prematurely and live and grow up and be perfectly healthly little babies.
My wife runs a website for pregnant ladies (ttc.loungeplace.com), and she recently had a mother lose her baby to premature labor at 24 weeks. Not long after another mother went into premature labor - also at 24 weeks - and the baby is successfully living. Yet another user previously had twins delivered at 26 weeks by c-section. One baby lived, the other died. As you can see, your definition is impossible to co-oerce into these situations.
Thoughts?
As you can see, your definition is impossible to co-oerce into these situations.
As you didn't see, my definition gave no timetable, nor did I say we should use it for the purpose of creating even more laws. I simply told you my definition for when a fetus becomes a human -- at the point where it can be removed from the host and live. How exactly could the definition get any better?
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
If you want to kill yourself, that's YOUR choice. Not your mom's.
Wow, poor time to bring this up Mr. Conservative, as your party sides with the delusional parents of Terry Schiavo and decimates her wishes to let her body die long after her mind and soul already has.
Conservatives don't hold the view that it is your right to kill yourself. Libertarians do. Also, the only person who claims that Ms Schiavo said she wanted to die is the one person who stands the most to gain from her death.
Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
I personally define the baby as a human when brain activity starts. No brain activity=no self=not human (IMO).
Medical science seems to back me up here I think.
It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
You should stipulate that it needs to live without assistive medical technology, as the pro-life defender here seems to be convinced that medical technology can make anything live, including a 24-week prematurely-born infant.
He'll probably nitpick, so you should define "live" as "persist in an independent animated state with heartbeat and breath for a period longer than one day."
Reinvent the wheel only at either a lower cost, greater effectiveness, or your own personal enrichment and satisfaction.
Conservatives don't hold the view that it is your right to kill yourself. Libertarians do.
However, the person I was responding to was most definitely a pro-life (when it comes to abortion) conservative. I can't help it if he didn't get the memo about the right-to-die cases.
Also, the only person who claims that Ms Schiavo said she wanted to die is the one person who stands the most to gain from her death.
What does he have to gain by her death? Any money from the insurance was long spent on keeping her body alive. He was offered $15 million to sign over the custodial rights to her parents, and refused to do so. And logic would dictate that he was in a much better position to have heard her wishes about this scenario compared to her parents, since he actually lived with her for the years preceding her accident.
So remind me again what he has to gain from her death? Peace of mind? After 15 years watching his brain dead wife be kept alive against her will, I'd say he's earned it.
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
"Medical science seems to back me up here I think."
Maybe. But what will cause some to argue with you is the destiny of that particular organism. Some will feel that if, in the natural course of things the baby will turn into a human, then it already is human.
I'm not arguing with you, rather just pointing out how some people see it.
"Derp de derp."
Try removing a foetus any time inside the first trimester and see if it survives.
Maybe. But what will cause some to argue with you is the destiny of that particular organism. Some will feel that if, in the natural course of things the baby will turn into a human, then it already is human.
OK Devil's advocate here....... In the natural course of things => by using birth control, you interfered w/ the destiny of that particular organism.
In the natural course of things => if you are fertile, and abstain from sex, you are interfering with destiny.
We are sentinent beings, EVERYTHING we do interferes w/ destiny. In the natural course of things =>
Nunchucks don't kill people NINJAS kill people
Unborm child? Spare us your idiotic euphemisms!
I think the difference is at some point the parents stop interferring, and nature independent of the parents takes course. You can always actively sabotage an unwanted pregnancy, but, barring that, there is a point that a baby will be born if no adverse action is taken.
By taking birth control, or abstaining, or whatnot, you are preventing nature from taking root and doing that which is natural. You are preventing fertilization, which is when two diverigent human cell lines unify and produce a new DNA pattern.
I don't think you are going down the right path.. but I can't think of a better or more sensible one.