Here's the thing though, I don't understand why under 98 that you have resource problems whenever you set a page file size rather than letting Windows do it. I personally have tried to set a size and it runs slower, even though the same setup under XP runs better.

A deeper explination of what I mean. Does it not make sense to statically set the size of your page file, that way it's one large chunk? What windows does by default is uses the min size of your page file on your hard drive... but whenever it needs more space and goes to the max size, it then has to use more space off the hard drive. So really part of your page file could be at the start of your hard drive (well after where Windows itself is installed at least), then the other part would be at the end of your hard drive. So it has to search both pieces trying to find both. What I do is take and set the min size and max size to the same thing (the magic number seems to be 3 times the amount of RAM in the system) and put that at the start of a freshly formatted secondary drive.

To me that would maximize proformance, and on Windows XP it does. But on Windows 98 it doesn't. Anyway I thought I would bring it up since I thought about it whenever Und3ertak3r made the comment:

I have had customers running fixed Swap file size have resource problems
Sorry if I got off track a little, just was wondering if anyone tried the same thing or might have a logical reasoning for why.

~AciD