Author: Dieter Buerssner
Date: 14:09:51 05/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 29, 2002 at 07:11:54, Guido wrote: Interesting post, Guido. >For example the KRBBKRR ending occupy in my indexing scheme little more than 85 >Gb. Do you mean 85 Gb of indeces or 85 Gb disk space. With the forumula 462*62*61*60*59*58/(2*2!) I get about 9^*10^10 which is about 84 Gb of indices. This would only leave 1 byte per position (so no mates longer 127). Do you have any other tricks, that save a significant amount of index space? I am aware of some "immediate check squares" that can be left out. And - as you explained me earlier, the case where all but one man are on the diagonal. But would think, that this will only save few percents. >I think that CPU time in generating 6- and 7-men endings is surely the biggest >problem, together with the requested characteristics of the disks, but when 64 >bits processor and large and fast disks will be cheaply available, computations >of EGTB could be done for the most part in parallel by many people on different >computers (as it is done now for Mersenne's primes), sending reciprocally their >results to the other partecipants, so reducing the years requested for this job. I have no idea, how the job could be parallelized for a single pawnless TB. For pawns, sure, because one could have an extra TB for each pawn position. But still then, the ones with more advanced pawns would already need to be available, to calculate the ones with less advanced pawns. So, say for single pawn TB at most 8 could be done in parallel (a7-h7, and so on). Do I miss here anything? Guido, do you have a TB generator? DTM or DTC? Will it take the 50 moves rule into account? Cheers, Dieter
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.