Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account


Photo

Puzzling Registry Size Issue

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
144 replies to this topic

#76
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

But you can also export the whole registry to, say, RegFile.reg, then go to pure DOS (not a DOS box) and run:
smartdrv
regedit /c <path>\RegFile.reg

You'll get essentially the same results.

NB: The above applies to the registry *compactors*.

My 'system.dat' is about 12M, and I just tried the above. Unfortunately, the "regedit" step stopped at 74% complete (no progress for 30 minutes) and I was forced to reboot. In DOS mode, I observed that 'system.dat' was now about 9M. I then did a plain vanilla 'scanreg', which reported the registry corrupted and restored a backup copy. So it looks like the above procedure cannot handle a "large" registry either.

BTW, while I was able to find the Japanese 'regcon' package (version 3.11, file 'rgcon311.lzh') via the Internet Archive, the links to the English translations here are defunct, so I was unable to try this.

Joe.


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#77
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,869 posts
  • Joined 07-April 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

Hi, Joe! :hello:
I guess you've not been following the forum as you should... :whistle:
Rick just reposted some of those apps, including RegCon, a few days ago... :D

Am interested in experience and recommendations concerning "registry cleanup software for Windows ME." was not thinking about registry problems due to malware but just all the junk that Windows adds with time.

Much of what Windows collects is usage tracks. One of the best tools for those on 9X is MRU blaster.

As for destroying your system, you can avoid this by using TestRun by BB to make a test registry to work on. You can also boot to DOS and back up system.dat and user.dat to another location first. If you trash your registry, just restore them from DOS.

I'm not sure of the availability of either so I've uploaded copies of both.

In the thread I linked to earlier, the RegCon utility is good for compacting the registry. I've uploaded it here.
The translated registry docs mentioned are uploaded here.
Both are 7zip archives.

When you get the registry cleaned out, compacted, and optimized, the link in my signature describes using batch files that will keep it that way.



#78
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Hi, Joe! :hello:
I guess you've not been following the forum as you should... :whistle:
Rick just reposted some of those apps, including RegCon, a few days ago...

Thanks, Den.

Unfortunately, time has been rather scarce lately. However, I did check that this thread hadn't been updated before posting. I'll be downloading those files shortly.

Also, the caution about the "regedit /c" technique still stands. I tried a refinement of this as follows :
1. Export the hives of the registry as separate files.
2. In DOS, start a new registry with "regedit /c hkcr.reg"
3. Add the other hives in turn, ie. "regedit hkcu.reg", "regedit hklm.reg", etc.
However, at "regedit hklm.reg", this error was produced : "Cannot import hklm.reg: Error accessing the registry."

Joe.

PS. I've now tried the English-patched 'RegCon' utility and unfortunately, this crashes with the error "SYSTEM.DAT: make sfx failure(32809)". I also tried the associated 'regstrip' utility, and this loads 'user.dat' OK but fails on 'system.dat' (gets part way through, so it looks like a size issue). So, no joy with these utilities by 'haltz'.

I also downloaded but can't use the "TestRun by BB" utility, since that is hardcoded for Windows installations on drive C: (whereas mine is on drive E:).

BTW 'scanreg' and Norton WinDoctor (1998 vintage) both say my registry is OK.

Edited by jds, 31 May 2011 - 02:03 AM.


#79
rloew

rloew

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined 30-May 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

The one thing that still gets me about all this is that MS have always maintained that there is no size limit on the registry in Windows 98 (as I believe there was in Windows 95.)
From my experience, and others, in certain circumstances this is just not true, because of the 16MB memory limitation on start-up, which unbelievably still seems to apply on Windows 2000 as well!
:)

There is no 16MB limitation on the Registry size. I just tested an 18MB Registry. The 16MB limit occurs when the Registry and/or Gigabit Ethernet Drivers take up too much of the lowest 16MB of Physical RAM. I added the /M Patch to my RAM Limitation Patch to insure that this did not happen regardless of Registry Size or type of Ethernet.
Ye who enter my domain. Beware! Lest you become educated in the mysteries of the universe and suffer forever from the desire to know more.

#80
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

There is no 16MB limitation on the Registry size. I just tested an 18MB Registry. The 16MB limit occurs when the Registry and/or Gigabit Ethernet Drivers take up too much of the lowest 16MB of Physical RAM. I added the /M Patch to my RAM Limitation Patch to insure that this did not happen regardless of Registry Size or type of Ethernet.

Do the MS 'scanreg' and 'regedit' DOS tools work properly for you with such large registries?

I've found (per above) that 'regedit' does not. As for 'scanreg', it seems happy to backup, restore and "vanilla test" large registries, although I haven't been brave enough to try "scanreg /fix" since my registry has grown beyond the 8M mark that is mentioned earlier in this thread.

Joe.

#81
Dave-H

Dave-H

    Friend of MSFN

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 813 posts
  • Joined 04-January 06
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag


The one thing that still gets me about all this is that MS have always maintained that there is no size limit on the registry in Windows 98 (as I believe there was in Windows 95.)
From my experience, and others, in certain circumstances this is just not true, because of the 16MB memory limitation on start-up, which unbelievably still seems to apply on Windows 2000 as well!
:)

There is no 16MB limitation on the Registry size. I just tested an 18MB Registry. The 16MB limit occurs when the Registry and/or Gigabit Ethernet Drivers take up too much of the lowest 16MB of Physical RAM. I added the /M Patch to my RAM Limitation Patch to insure that this did not happen regardless of Registry Size or type of Ethernet.

I wasn't expecting a reply to this after two years, but thanks Rudolph!
:hello:

Dual boot Windows 98SE SP2.1a and Windows XP Professional SP3.
Dual 3.2GHz Xeons with 4GB RAM. ATI Radeon X850 Graphics 1920x1080 32 Bit Colour with Large Fonts.


#82
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,869 posts
  • Joined 07-April 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

@RLoew: You talked about a 18MiB registry and the lowest 16 MiB... may I ask, just out of curiosity, at which physical address, even if variable, does Win 9x/ME start loading the registry? Just above the HMA?

@jds: IIRR, the demo version of the RAM Limitation Patch works for 10 min before rebooting... it might be enough, with the /M option, for RegCon to compact your registry (but do create a backup first, and store it safely, of course). BTW, how much RAM does your machine have?

#83
rloew

rloew

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined 30-May 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag


There is no 16MB limitation on the Registry size. I just tested an 18MB Registry. The 16MB limit occurs when the Registry and/or Gigabit Ethernet Drivers take up too much of the lowest 16MB of Physical RAM. I added the /M Patch to my RAM Limitation Patch to insure that this did not happen regardless of Registry Size or type of Ethernet.

Do the MS 'scanreg' and 'regedit' DOS tools work properly for you with such large registries?

I've found (per above) that 'regedit' does not. As for 'scanreg', it seems happy to backup, restore and "vanilla test" large registries, although I haven't been brave enough to try "scanreg /fix" since my registry has grown beyond the 8M mark that is mentioned earlier in this thread.

Joe.

Haven't tried SCANREG, but REGEDIT (DOS) does work. Extracting and rebuilding the Registry took two hours with SMARTDRV enabled. Without SMARTDRV plan on two DAYS.

@RLoew: You talked about a 18MiB registry and the lowest 16 MiB... may I ask, just out of curiosity, at which physical address, even if variable, does Win 9x/ME start loading the registry? Just above the HMA?

EMM386 and any XMS TSR's, if any, come first.
The Registry appears to be next.
The VMM32 Modules follow.

The /M Option disrupts this allocation, so that the Registry and VMM Modules are placed above the 16MB range.
Ye who enter my domain. Beware! Lest you become educated in the mysteries of the universe and suffer forever from the desire to know more.

#84
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

@jds: IIRR, the demo version of the RAM Limitation Patch works for 10 min before rebooting... it might be enough, with the /M option, for RegCon to compact your registry (but do create a backup first, and store it safely, of course). BTW, how much RAM does your machine have?

Hey, great idea! Unfortunately however, it didn't work. RegCon failed with the same error.


Do the MS 'scanreg' and 'regedit' DOS tools work properly for you with such large registries?

I've found (per above) that 'regedit' does not. As for 'scanreg', it seems happy to backup, restore and "vanilla test" large registries, although I haven't been brave enough to try "scanreg /fix" since my registry has grown beyond the 8M mark that is mentioned earlier in this thread.

Haven't tried SCANREG, but REGEDIT (DOS) does work. Extracting and rebuilding the Registry took two hours with SMARTDRV enabled. Without SMARTDRV plan on two DAYS.

Interesting. So with 'regedit' it seems, YMMV. I can export the registry OK, but not create/import it.

Joe.

#85
rloew

rloew

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined 30-May 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Interesting. So with 'regedit' it seems, YMMV. I can export the registry OK, but not create/import it.

I did not try to Import anything, but I did create a new Registry successfully. It just takes a long time. As I noted, make sure you use SMARTDRV or you will be waiting days.
If it fails, there may be other issues, not just size.
Ye who enter my domain. Beware! Lest you become educated in the mysteries of the universe and suffer forever from the desire to know more.

#86
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,869 posts
  • Joined 07-April 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator


@RLoew: You talked about a 18MiB registry and the lowest 16 MiB... may I ask, just out of curiosity, at which physical address, even if variable, does Win 9x/ME start loading the registry? Just above the HMA?

EMM386 and any XMS TSR's, if any, come first.
The Registry appears to be next.
The VMM32 Modules follow.

The /M Option disrupts this allocation, so that the Registry and VMM Modules are placed above the 16MB range.

Thanks a lot! :thumbup
I've got a much better mental picture, now, of how it works.
BTW, XMS TSRs are rare birds, indeed. I wouldn't even have thought about them here, had you not mentioned them.

#87
rloew

rloew

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined 30-May 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

BTW, XMS TSRs are rare birds, indeed. I wouldn't even have thought about them here, had you not mentioned them.

Not so rare. Anybody's XMS RAMDisk will do.
Ye who enter my domain. Beware! Lest you become educated in the mysteries of the universe and suffer forever from the desire to know more.

#88
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag


Interesting. So with 'regedit' it seems, YMMV. I can export the registry OK, but not create/import it.

I did not try to Import anything, but I did create a new Registry successfully. It just takes a long time. As I noted, make sure you use SMARTDRV or you will be waiting days.
If it fails, there may be other issues, not just size.

Hmmm ... the problem is with the import/create step of the procedure. So perhaps 'regedit' doesn't work any different for you as it does (doesn't) for me. And yes, it took over half an hour (estimate) to export the registry.

Joe.

#89
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
I think this thread should be noted here : http://www.msfn.org/...98-seme-topics/

Also, if anyone has any suggestions on how to recreate a large registry from exported REG file(s), that would make this thread even more useful. After all this time, I still haven't found any way to do this.

In theory, the most reliable way to make a registry devoid of wasted space is to export it to a REG file (or files) and then import the file(s). However, while the first part of this process works fine (albeit slowly), the second part of this process fails with large registries.

Joe.

#90
rloew

rloew

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined 30-May 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
I'm not sure but it may be necessary to break up the import into multiple pieces.

I was able to build a Registry of 19MB by repeatedly importing a synthesized import file containing a key with over a megabyte of value data in it, changing the Key name each time.
I created the large Registry to test my RAM Limitation Patch's /M option that supports large Registries with Windows 9x.
Ye who enter my domain. Beware! Lest you become educated in the mysteries of the universe and suffer forever from the desire to know more.

#91
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

I'm not sure but it may be necessary to break up the import into multiple pieces.

I was able to build a Registry of 19MB by repeatedly importing a synthesized import file containing a key with over a megabyte of value data in it, changing the Key name each time.
I created the large Registry to test my RAM Limitation Patch's /M option that supports large Registries with Windows 9x.

Thanks for the input, Mr Loew.

I also tried this by exporting the individual hives (HKLM, HKCU, etc.) separately, then importing these REG files one-by-one. I used the User.dat (/L) and user name (/R) command line switches to avoid breaking the working registry. Unfortunately, after a certain size was reached (can't recall exact size, something over 8M), importing further hive REG files failed.

Joe.

PS. To our respected mod's : I think this thread should be listed as Important/Stickified/Pinned.

Edited by jds, 28 August 2012 - 09:30 PM.


#92
shae

shae

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 273 posts
  • Joined 06-July 08
Another data point. My registry size (base 10):

SYSTEM.DAT 14.5MB
USER.DAT 3.1MB

#93
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,869 posts
  • Joined 07-April 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

PS. To our respected mod's : I think this thread should be listed as Important/Stickified/Pinned.

Agreed. Done!

#94
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Agreed. Done!

Thanks, Den! :thumbup

Joe.

#95
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Another data point. My registry size (base 10):

SYSTEM.DAT 14.5MB
USER.DAT 3.1MB

Wow!

Mine's 13MB and 1.8MB respectively.

I recently deleted dotNet 1.0 and 1.1 frameworks because my system was becoming unstable. I believe that was due to this registry size issue, since I wasn't actually running any dotNet applications, particularly not the 1.0 or 1.1 varieties.

Joe.

#96
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 14,411 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

PS. To our respected mod's : I think this thread should be listed as Important/Stickified/Pinned.

Agreed. Done!

Would this imply that dencorso is to be considered among the respected mod's (in the sense of NOT among the UNrespected ones)? :unsure: :ph34r:

;) :angel :lol:

Seriously, a "semi-random" idea, possibly void of any utility, would the offline registry library work?
http://reboot.pro/11212/
http://reboot.pro/11312/
(kernelEx/whatever)?

jaclaz

#97
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Seriously, a "semi-random" idea, possibly void of any utility, would the offline registry library work?
http://reboot.pro/11212/
http://reboot.pro/11312/
(kernelEx/whatever)?

jaclaz

Thank you sooooo much for those interesting links. :thumbup

It's taken a while to follow all the threads/leads. I've downloaded 'offlinereg.zip', 'RawReg13.zip' and even 'regv.zip' and 'regs.zip'. I didn't download the "regfs" stuff, because I have my doubts it's a viable option here. I'll try to find if a 9X version of the "Offline Registry Library" was ever released, since at a file level, 9X and NT registries aren't compatible (they don't even use the same file names or number of files). Then I'll see if there's any practical way to apply any of these tools to this problem.

Joe.

Edited by jds, 01 September 2012 - 07:53 AM.


#98
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 14,411 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

It's taken a while to follow all the threads/leads. I've downloaded 'offlinereg.zip', 'RawReg13.zip' and even 'regv.zip' and 'regs.zip'. I didn't download the "regfs" stuff, because I have my doubts it's a viable option here. I'll try to find if a 9X version of the "Offline Registry Library" was ever released, since at a file level, 9X and NT registries aren't compatible (they don't even use the same file names or number of files). Then I'll see if there's any practical way to apply any of these tools to this problem.

I will give you some good and some bad news. :w00t:

There is NO such thing as a "9x version of the Offline Registry Library" (AFAIK, but I tend to be usually quite well informed on this specific topic ;) ).

The Rawreg is (unfortunately) a half @§§ed left in an UNfinished state, and it is perfectly UNuseful. :no:

Still AFAIK the actual file format for the Registry has not big changes between 9x and NT :whistle: , and since you are going to use offline access to the file(s) the actual filenames (and the way they are combined in an actual ONliine registry) is pretty much irrelevant.
Compare with:
http://paullee.ru/regstry.html
Via google translate:
http://translate.goo...ru/regstry.html

jaclaz

#99
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

I will give you some good and some bad news. :w00t:

There is NO such thing as a "9x version of the Offline Registry Library" (AFAIK, but I tend to be usually quite well informed on this specific topic ;) ).

The Rawreg is (unfortunately) a half @§§ed left in an UNfinished state, and it is perfectly UNuseful. :no:

Still AFAIK the actual file format for the Registry has not big changes between 9x and NT :whistle: , and since you are going to use offline access to the file(s) the actual filenames (and the way they are combined in an actual ONliine registry) is pretty much irrelevant.
Compare with:
http://paullee.ru/regstry.html

That's just bad news, isn't it? If there were a 9X version of the library, then the offline registry editor tool might be rebuilt and hopefully work OK with the 9X registry files. But as an offline registry editor works directly on the files, not the loaded registry via an API, how can an NT version be used, since 9X has two registry files, whereas NT has about half a dozen? In other words, if I were to (re)build NT registry files from exported 9X "reg" file(s), how would I merge the half dozen NT registry files into the two registry files that 9X requires?

Joe.

#100
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,869 posts
  • Joined 07-April 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

The only tool that's able to deal with both types of registry is Regview, by the "General Paul Lee". Version 4.2 is quite stable, although not very intuitive to use: supposedly, if one starts it with no parameter, it would allow one to navigate to the file of interest, but I've never been able to get that part to work OK... when, however, it's run with the name of the target registry file one wants to edit as 1st and only command line parameter, it works like clockwork. However I've never used it to modify multi-string values in the XP registry, so I cannot guarantee it works as advised with thouse types, which are the main difference between the XP and 98SE registries. With the 98SE registry it just works.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



How to remove advertisement from MSFN