Windows Paging/Swap File Size

[Troyer]

I've always heard that you ideally want your paging file to be set statically to 1.5X the size of your physical RAM, not a min/max setting for dynamic, as best practice.  With computers regularly having 4GB and up now, is that still the thoughts on what's best practice?
Do I really want a 6GB swap file?
Is there a point of diminishing returns where you want 1X, 1/2X, no swap file?

If it matters, I'm running XP.  Also, would it be different on Vista (or Win7)?

[Redbear8]

Well Since it was always best practice and not really mandatory, at least hasn't been for some time, I don't think diminishing returns really apply. Do you really need a page file that large? No, you don't "need" it but if you have the space free to give it the correct page file you might as well use it. As RAM keeps increasing in quantity, the programs using that RAM keep getting more demanding.

[gr0n]

If you have the hard drive space, yes, I'd say do 1.5x RAM.  Like Rando said though, this is just a best practice...and theoretically yields the best performance.  Also, by making the min and max size the same you prevent the pagefile from dynamically growing and shrinking, which leads to pagefile fragmentation.