NT/2k/XP are still very limited in the max number of simultaneous applications



Caty Hespel
07-09-2005, 11:25 PM
Hi all,
On december 31. Marco Venturi described a problem (see
below). My PC is suffering from identical symptoms (same
OS, same behavior).
Has anyone since managed to solve this problem?
Has anyone had any useful comments or suggestions on how
to solve this problem?
Any help is much appreciated.
Caty
----------------------------------------------------------
Hi all!

I am a Windows power user and I always had, even with
different PC and RAM quantity, a problem recurring
atleast one time a day: when I have opened more than 20-
30 programs, the opening of new windows/programs doesn't
have effect or gives progressively strange effects (i.e.
windows without menu and buttons) till it doesn't do
anything anymore.

In this precise moment it's happening on my XP.
My strong suspect is that this has always been an
internal software limitation (connected to the limited
size of resource heaps) of Windows NT/2K/XP, as when in
Windows 3.x/9x/ME one got the "insufficient memory"
error.

My Task Manager is showing the following data and I can't
open even little applications without closing some
application before:

Totals:
Handles: 23194
Threads: 1249
Processes: 74

Physical Memory (K):
Total: 752016
Available: 154048
System Cache: 230176

Commit Charge (K):
Total: 1367024
Limit: 1871520
Peak: 1448860

Kernel Memory (K):
Total: 182012
Paged: 158696
Nonpaged: 23316

Anyway I don't think there's a strict relation of this
problem with the total physical memory or the total
physical+virtual memory. I think more that it's an
intrinsic Windows limitation. I think that it's a matter
of system resources/resource heaps instead of memory, as
this article describes well:
http://aumha.org/win4/a/resour­ce.php (System Resources
FAQ).

In the case I try to launch a graphic Win16 application I
get the explicit error: "The Win 16 Subsystem has
insufficient resources to continue running.
Click on OK, close your applications, and restart your
machine." Fortunately it's normally sufficient to close
some application, without restarting, to come back to use
the program.
Setting this application to "Run in separate memory
space" or setting it in Compatibility Mode 9x doesn't
solve.

I'ld like to find a document with the "ultimate"
explanation of how is this limitation in Windows XP (NOT
an old document regarding 3.x/9x/ME nor NT) and to find
the way to increase the number of application I can open
simultaneously or, if this is not possible, how and how
much in the future this limitation will be enhanced by
Microsoft in future versions of Windows.
Does someone know something about all this?

I found this software that could help for win 16 programs
but it's too old:
http://www.qualitas.com/tech/m­ax/goahead.htm.
and I found this opinion on the net: "Ron M. replies: RAM
Defrag programs are totally useless and cannot perform
any beneficial function for any computer. Period. All RAM
addresses are equally accessible and there is zero
difference in the time required to access addresses at
the opposite ends of the RAM address range as compared to
adjacent addresses. Both are virtually instantaneous.
Also "system resources" as the term was used in Windows
95/98/Me are totally irrelevant in Windows XP because XP
uses 32 bit resource heaps exclusively."

Marco Venturi
----------------------------------------------------------
This is the original thread:
http://groups.google.be/group/microsoft.public.windowsxp.h
elp_and_support/browse_frm/thread/8c94e29ba94ea67e/af46735
3caa9f4d9?tvc=1&q=NT%2F2k%
2FXP+are+still+very+limited+in+the+max+&hl=nl#af467353caa9
f4d9

Rock
07-09-2005, 11:25 PM
Caty Hespel wrote:

> Hi all,
> On december 31. Marco Venturi described a problem (see
> below). My PC is suffering from identical symptoms (same
> OS, same behavior).
> Has anyone since managed to solve this problem?
> Has anyone had any useful comments or suggestions on how
> to solve this problem?
> Any help is much appreciated.
> Caty
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Hi all!
>
> I am a Windows power user and I always had, even with
> different PC and RAM quantity, a problem recurring
> atleast one time a day: when I have opened more than 20-
> 30 programs, the opening of new windows/programs doesn't
> have effect or gives progressively strange effects (i.e.
> windows without menu and buttons) till it doesn't do
> anything anymore.
>
> In this precise moment it's happening on my XP.
> My strong suspect is that this has always been an
> internal software limitation (connected to the limited
> size of resource heaps) of Windows NT/2K/XP, as when in
> Windows 3.x/9x/ME one got the "insufficient memory"
> error.
>
> My Task Manager is showing the following data and I can't
> open even little applications without closing some
> application before:
>
> Totals:
> Handles: 23194
> Threads: 1249
> Processes: 74
>
> Physical Memory (K):
> Total: 752016
> Available: 154048
> System Cache: 230176
>
> Commit Charge (K):
> Total: 1367024
> Limit: 1871520
> Peak: 1448860
>
> Kernel Memory (K):
> Total: 182012
> Paged: 158696
> Nonpaged: 23316
>
> Anyway I don't think there's a strict relation of this
> problem with the total physical memory or the total
> physical+virtual memory. I think more that it's an
> intrinsic Windows limitation. I think that it's a matter
> of system resources/resource heaps instead of memory, as
> this article describes well:
> http://aumha.org/win4/a/resour­ce.php (System Resources
> FAQ).
>
> In the case I try to launch a graphic Win16 application I
> get the explicit error: "The Win 16 Subsystem has
> insufficient resources to continue running.
> Click on OK, close your applications, and restart your
> machine." Fortunately it's normally sufficient to close
> some application, without restarting, to come back to use
> the program.
> Setting this application to "Run in separate memory
> space" or setting it in Compatibility Mode 9x doesn't
> solve.
>
> I'ld like to find a document with the "ultimate"
> explanation of how is this limitation in Windows XP (NOT
> an old document regarding 3.x/9x/ME nor NT) and to find
> the way to increase the number of application I can open
> simultaneously or, if this is not possible, how and how
> much in the future this limitation will be enhanced by
> Microsoft in future versions of Windows.
> Does someone know something about all this?
>
> I found this software that could help for win 16 programs
> but it's too old:
> http://www.qualitas.com/tech/m­ax/goahead.htm.
> and I found this opinion on the net: "Ron M. replies: RAM
> Defrag programs are totally useless and cannot perform
> any beneficial function for any computer. Period. All RAM
> addresses are equally accessible and there is zero
> difference in the time required to access addresses at
> the opposite ends of the RAM address range as compared to
> adjacent addresses. Both are virtually instantaneous.
> Also "system resources" as the term was used in Windows
> 95/98/Me are totally irrelevant in Windows XP because XP
> uses 32 bit resource heaps exclusively."
>
> Marco Venturi
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> This is the original thread:
> http://groups.google.be/group/microsoft.public.windowsxp.h
> elp_and_support/browse_frm/thread/8c94e29ba94ea67e/af46735
> 3caa9f4d9?tvc=1&q=NT%2F2k%
> 2FXP+are+still+very+limited+in+the+max+&hl=nl#af467353caa9
> f4d9

Read all of the thread you mentioned. The only resolutions are listed
in there.

--
Rock
MS MVP Windows - Shell/User

07-09-2005, 11:25 PM
hey this doesnt answer your question but I cannot help
asking it anyway, why in the world would anyone
particularly yourself need to have 30 programs running
simultaneously on xp?

I used to do support and every once in a while someone
comes in who wants an answer to a problem like yours and
the question I always wanted to ask but couldnt because
of being the support person is why you would ever need to
do this?

The suspected answer is always something like,because I
want to and there is never any real logical reason or its
my computer and I want it to be able to do that or
microsoft says you can so I want it to do it.

So if there is actually a logical reason to run 30
programs simultaneously would you please share it with
the group.

P.S. No one can multitask 30 programs at a time so
please dont give any nonsense like that as an answer, it
would be very difficult to multitask more than a couple
of items at a time.
>-----Original Message-----
>Hi all,
>On december 31. Marco Venturi described a problem (see
>below). My PC is suffering from identical symptoms (same
>OS, same behavior).
>Has anyone since managed to solve this problem?
>Has anyone had any useful comments or suggestions on how
>to solve this problem?
>Any help is much appreciated.
>Caty
>---------------------------------------------------------
-
>Hi all!
>
>I am a Windows power user and I always had, even with
>different PC and RAM quantity, a problem recurring
>atleast one time a day: when I have opened more than 20-
>30 programs, the opening of new windows/programs doesn't
>have effect or gives progressively strange effects (i.e.
>windows without menu and buttons) till it doesn't do
>anything anymore.
>
>In this precise moment it's happening on my XP.
>My strong suspect is that this has always been an
>internal software limitation (connected to the limited
>size of resource heaps) of Windows NT/2K/XP, as when in
>Windows 3.x/9x/ME one got the "insufficient memory"
>error.
>
>My Task Manager is showing the following data and I
can't
>open even little applications without closing some
>application before:
>
>Totals:
> Handles: 23194
> Threads: 1249
> Processes: 74
>
>Physical Memory (K):
> Total: 752016
> Available: 154048
> System Cache: 230176
>
>Commit Charge (K):
> Total: 1367024
> Limit: 1871520
> Peak: 1448860
>
>Kernel Memory (K):
> Total: 182012
> Paged: 158696
> Nonpaged: 23316
>
>Anyway I don't think there's a strict relation of this
>problem with the total physical memory or the total
>physical+virtual memory. I think more that it's an
>intrinsic Windows limitation. I think that it's a matter
>of system resources/resource heaps instead of memory, as
>this article describes well:
>http://aumha.org/win4/a/resour­ce.php (System Resources
>FAQ).
>
>In the case I try to launch a graphic Win16 application
I
>get the explicit error: "The Win 16 Subsystem has
>insufficient resources to continue running.
>Click on OK, close your applications, and restart your
>machine." Fortunately it's normally sufficient to close
>some application, without restarting, to come back to
use
>the program.
>Setting this application to "Run in separate memory
>space" or setting it in Compatibility Mode 9x doesn't
>solve.
>
>I'ld like to find a document with the "ultimate"
>explanation of how is this limitation in Windows XP (NOT
>an old document regarding 3.x/9x/ME nor NT) and to find
>the way to increase the number of application I can open
>simultaneously or, if this is not possible, how and how
>much in the future this limitation will be enhanced by
>Microsoft in future versions of Windows.
>Does someone know something about all this?
>
>I found this software that could help for win 16
programs
>but it's too old:
>http://www.qualitas.com/tech/m­ax/goahead.htm.
>and I found this opinion on the net: "Ron M. replies:
RAM
>Defrag programs are totally useless and cannot perform
>any beneficial function for any computer. Period. All
RAM
>addresses are equally accessible and there is zero
>difference in the time required to access addresses at
>the opposite ends of the RAM address range as compared
to
>adjacent addresses. Both are virtually instantaneous.
>Also "system resources" as the term was used in Windows
>95/98/Me are totally irrelevant in Windows XP because XP
>uses 32 bit resource heaps exclusively."
>
>Marco Venturi
>---------------------------------------------------------
-
>This is the original thread:
>http://groups.google.be/group/microsoft.public.windowsxp.
h
>elp_and_support/browse_frm/thread/8c94e29ba94ea67e/af4673
5
>3caa9f4d9?tvc=1&q=NT%2F2k%
>2FXP+are+still+very+limited+in+the+max+&hl=nl#af467353caa
9
>f4d9
>.
>

Caty Hespel
07-09-2005, 11:25 PM
>hey this doesnt answer your question but I cannot help
>asking it anyway, why in the world would anyone
>particularly yourself need to have 30 programs running
>simultaneously on xp?

I'm not running that many applications. The 30 apps
mentioned where by the other person experiencing the same
problem.
When I'm translation online help, I'm like to run:
- Outlook (which I never close)
- Word
- RoboHelp XP
- Euroglot (translation tool 16-bit app)
- Contact (our own CRM program)
- Internet Explorer
- MusicMatch (I like some music in the background)
- One or more instances of Windows Exporer
- SnagIt
- Adobe Elements

When my PC is just started, I can start them all up. But
after a while they just start malfunctioning and I can no
longer work with some of them without closing another one
first.
Symptoms are:
Menus that do not open when clicked upon, menu-bars that
disappear, applications that simply dos not open, etc.
Very strange and annoying.

>Read all of the thread you mentioned.
>The only resolutions are listed in there.
>Rock
>MS MVP Windows - Shell/User

I have actually read all the thread and nothing I read in
there solved my problem.

I don't think that it's too much to ask. On my Windows
2000 system I never had that problem. As I'm part of a
big organization I cannot choose which OS to use so I am
forced to work under XP. This means that it's no option
to suggest downgrading or changing OS.
So any suggestion on how to solve the problem in XP is
more than welcome.

Caty

PS. One of my colleagues is starting to have the same
problems but less frequent.

Rock
07-09-2005, 11:31 PM
Caty Hespel wrote:

Answers inline

<snip>


> I'm not running that many applications. The 30 apps
> mentioned where by the other person experiencing the same
> problem.

> When I'm translation online help, I'm like to run:
> - Outlook (which I never close)
> - Word
> - RoboHelp XP
> - Euroglot (translation tool 16-bit app)
> - Contact (our own CRM program)
> - Internet Explorer
> - MusicMatch (I like some music in the background)
> - One or more instances of Windows Exporer
> - SnagIt
> - Adobe Elements

You didn't say that. You quoted the other post and asked if there was a
resolution. Now you're saying it's a different problem - ie many fewer
apps installed. Which is it?

>
> When my PC is just started, I can start them all up. But
> after a while they just start malfunctioning and I can no
> longer work with some of them without closing another one
> first.
> Symptoms are:
> Menus that do not open when clicked upon, menu-bars that
> disappear, applications that simply dos not open, etc.
> Very strange and annoying.
>

What is the system configuration, CPU, amount or ram? Have you
defragged lately and done a disk clean up? What is set up for the
pagefile? See this link for some information on how to set up virtual
memory in XP:

http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm

Also see:
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/slowcom.htm

Without you posting more specifics it's impossible to know for sure what
the issues might be.


--
Rock
MS MVP Windows - Shell/User

Caty
07-09-2005, 11:33 PM
Ok I'm guilty.

When was writing down my configuration, I noticed that my swap file
had decreased to about 350 Mb due to the lack of disk space (1,5Gb of
free space).
I freed some disk space, ran disk cleanup and defragmented. I now have
about 8Gb of free space left and my swap file is set to 1149Mb.

I'll keep on working for the time being and if I don't have anymore
problems, the message is clear: Make sure that you have enough disk
space left and check swap file!

Sorry to have wasted your time, and thanks for pointing me in the
right direction.

Rock
07-09-2005, 11:34 PM
Caty wrote:

> Ok I'm guilty.
>
> When was writing down my configuration, I noticed that my swap file
> had decreased to about 350 Mb due to the lack of disk space (1,5Gb of
> free space).
> I freed some disk space, ran disk cleanup and defragmented. I now have
> about 8Gb of free space left and my swap file is set to 1149Mb.
>
> I'll keep on working for the time being and if I don't have anymore
> problems, the message is clear: Make sure that you have enough disk
> space left and check swap file!
>
> Sorry to have wasted your time, and thanks for pointing me in the
> right direction.

Ok Caty, glad to help and that you got things fixed.

--
Rock
MS MVP Windows - Shell/User

Caty
07-09-2005, 11:57 PM
Rock <rock@mail.nospam.net> wrote in message news:<ufOwEN9WFHA.2448@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>...

> Ok Caty, glad to help and that you got things fixed.

I'd wasn't fixed right away. I had to set the page file to No page file first.
Then, after rebooting, I recreated the page file to the proposed size.

Maybe it got corrupt along the way?
Who knows? The mysterious ways of informatics, huh ...

But, as far as I can tell, everything works fine now.

Caty


NT/2k/XP are still very limited in the max number of simultaneous applications