Author: David Rasmussen
Date: 12:41:16 01/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2003 at 15:25:19, Dieter Buerssner wrote: >On January 16, 2003 at 13:31:39, David Rasmussen wrote: > >I have not read all the answers carefully, so sorry when I repeat some points. > >For me, OS cache seems to be more important, when heavily probing TBs than the >Nalimov-Cache. Access in the Nalimov-Cache is of course faster, but more space >(a major factor) is needed, to cache the same number of positions. So, >especially in heavy TB-probing situations, it will be useful, if you have a big >ammount of free RAM, that the OS can (and will) use for cache. > I only have 256MB RAM in this machine. That might be part of the problem. If that is the problem, is there anyway to confirm it? I guess I could look at the Windows Task Manager performance tab, and see how much cache is used, or something. >Another thing - don't install all TBs. If your engines has problems with missing >promotion cases, you must be careful to select them. Don't define T41_INCLUDE. > What is T41_INCLUDE? Also, I have _all_ 3-5 TBs, all 7.1GB of them. That's ok, isn't it? Also, I don't understand what you mean by problems with missing promotion cases. >Don'T forget to hash TB-positions. You can flag them somehow, so that they will >be good for a cutoff at any depth. > I store them as exact with maximum draft. But maybe I will check later if I have a bug that somehow causes these not to be stored, or not to produce a cutoff when re-encountered. /David
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.