Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 17:48:30 08/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 30, 2001 at 14:43:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 30, 2001 at 14:25:39, Scott Gasch wrote: > >>On August 30, 2001 at 14:07:50, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>> >>>Dumb question: >>>Why not let them all have their own move generator and just share the hash >>>table? >> >>I guess that's one approach -- run them as seperate processes in seperate >>virtual address spaces and simply share the hash table. I was planning on using >>simple threads in the same address space though. Not sure why, seems more >>straightforward to me... > > >One reason is that there are other things to share. Killer moves. History >move counts. move lists (you need to share a move list at a ply where more >than one processor is searching) and so forth... No you don't want to share killer moves. History moves do not give a speedup if you write a bunch of extra rules to order moves.
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.