Author: Mike Hood
Date: 14:40:41 04/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 02, 2002 at 16:32:54, Guido wrote: >On April 02, 2002 at 13:27:10, Mike Hood wrote: > >>The normal figure thrown about for the size of a complete 6-piece egtb >>collection is "about a terabyte". Can we try to make this figure a bit more >>accurate? In the tablebase generation program the file size calculation is >>separate from the generation itself, so it should be possible to calculate the >>size of the uncompressed files exactly. When we have that we can make an >>estimation of the size of the compressed tablebases (approx 20% of the >>uncompressed size). And when we have that figure we can sit back and watch the >>developments in storage media to see when 6-piece TBs become technically >>feasible. Constellation 3D promised their FMD technology would produce optical >>disks with a capacity of 1.5 terabyte, but they've failed to deliver so far. >> >>There should be 365 6-piece tablebase pairs of varying importance, in three main >>groups: >> >>Kxx-Kxx : 120 tablebases >>Kxxx-Kx : 175 tablebases >>Kxxxx-K : 70 tablebases >> >>If we have the size for each group we'll know how much space a person needs on >>his hard drive to generate KPPKPP, KPPPKP and KPPPPK respectively. Or someone >>can fire up his university's supercomputer. >> >>Maybe it's just an academic pursuit at present, but technology has a habit of >>overtaking you when you least expect it. >> >>And when we've finished with the 6-piece tablebases, what about the 1001 7-piece >>egtb's? >> >>Kxxx-Kxx : 525 tablebases >>Kxxxx-Kx : 350 tablebases >>Kxxxxx-K : 126 tablebases >> >>I bet you're all dying to get your hands on the KBBBBBK tablebase ;) > >For uncompressed endings I obtain these values: > >No. men Different Space > Endings in Mb (1Mb = 1024^2) > > 2 1 --- > 3 5 0.275 (kbk and knk excluded) > 4 30 152.333 > 5 110 31,865.260 > 6 365 5,150,003.501 > 7 1001 611,686,390.198 > 8 2520 59,916,917,072.203 > >Values reported are the result of an exact calculation using double precision >floating point, but they_are_depending_on_the_indexing_scheme adopted. >So they can be larger or smaller of the correspondent values obtained by other >indexing scheme. >Of course if the program is correct ... > >In details for 6 and 7 men: > >Kxx-Kxx 1,992,702.965 120 >Kxxx-Kx 2,525,840.429 175 >Kxxxx-K 631,460.107 70 > ------------- --- > 5,150,003.501 365 > >Kxxx-Kxx 382,303,993.874 525 >Kxxxx-Kx 191,151,996.937 350 >Kxxxxx-K 38,230,399.387 126 > --------------- ---- > 611,686,390.198 1001 > >Ciao >Guido So, assuming a 20% size after conversion, the total size of the 365 6-piece tablebases would be 0.98 Terabytes. So the estimation of 1 Terabyte being thrown around isn't too far off. Thanks, Guido. That's all I wanted to know.
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.