Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:19:34 03/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 08, 2001 at 03:08:51, Jouni Uski wrote: >I have read recommendations to use 4 or 8 megabytes for tablebase cache. But I >increased it to 16 MB and it seems to work fine. Isn't RAM always faster to >access than hard drive, so can't You simple allocate all free RAM to cache? >Additionally is there may be difference between Chessbase engines and winboard >engines in this respect? > >Jouni It depends on the operating system and its efficiency at buffering file I/O. The cache in Eugene's code simply gets hit _before_ the O/S is called to do any file I/O. Which means that stuff kept in Eugene's cache will be accessed more efficiently than if we have to take a system call, even though the system call might not result in any real I/O since the O/S might have the file block already in its cache as well. I would rather use Eugene's cache as it is simply a bit more efficient. But we are not talking about huge slow-downs if you use a small cache and let the operating system do the caching itself...
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.