Andy Fish wrote:
Hi

I have a laptop with 2gb RAM running vista and I currently have the page
file disabled (that's another story). I have just had a message saying
windows is running low on memory and I need to close some applications (even
though i'm hardly running anything)

when I look at task manager, I can see about 300mb used by running
applications, but 1200mb is used for the cache

so, vista has run out of physical memory because it's decided to use all the
memory for caching, leaving none for applications. and that means I need to
close down my applications???

please, please, someone tell me vista is not that dumb.


Vista is an inanimate object; a computer program, to be precise. It is
neither dumber nor smarter than the individual configuring it.


is there a sensible
explanation for this?

Andy




The "sensible" explanation is that *you* disabled the virtual memory of
an OS (and possibly one or more application) that's specifically
designed to use it. Re-enable the virtual memory, and watch the problem
go away.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

Andy Fish wrote:
with respect, that's not an explanation at all - let alone a sensible one


On the contrary, it's precisely the correct answer.


if i was using a lot of memory hungry programs and I didn't understand
virtual memory concepts, that would be a reasonable solution



Actually, it's be sensible if you truly *did* understand virtual
"memory concepts." This post of yours demonstrated the exact opposite,
though.


as I said in the orignal post, I was not using memory heavy programs - the
committed memory was mostly in use by vista's cache. this is just not
sensible behaviour for an operating system.


Well, feel free to design your own "sensible" operating system, then.
We'll all be waiting with bated breath. In the meantime, though, try to
remember that your personal likes/dislikes/opinions/superstitions (or
whatever) have no bearing on the technical answers to technical questions.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

"Bruce Chambers" wrote in message
...
Andy Fish wrote:
with respect, that's not an explanation at all - let alone a sensible one


On the contrary, it's precisely the correct answer.


if i was using a lot of memory hungry programs and I didn't understand
virtual memory concepts, that would be a reasonable solution



Actually, it's be sensible if you truly *did* understand virtual "memory
concepts." This post of yours demonstrated the exact opposite, though.


as I said in the orignal post, I was not using memory heavy programs -
the committed memory was mostly in use by vista's cache. this is just not
sensible behaviour for an operating system.


Well, feel free to design your own "sensible" operating system, then.
We'll all be waiting with bated breath. In the meantime, though, try to
remember that your personal likes/dislikes/opinions/superstitions (or
whatever) have no bearing on the technical answers to technical questions.


--

Bruce Chambers


Bruce,

This reminds me of a thread two or three years ago in which
the OP was trying to do something impossible in XP, and it
didn't work. I can't remember what the issue was. The replies
unanimously stated that it couldn't be done, with reasons why.
After some thick headed discussion, the OP's final response
was that he though that it should be able to be done the way
he wanted, and that he wanted someone to tell him how to do it.
That terminated that thread.

ID