Author: Georg v. Zimmermann
Date: 13:04:31 08/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
I understand this is not easy but IMHO its doable. I checked that my program needs the same ammount of memory on xp and win2000, and I would be suprised if it was different for other programs and other current windows versions. If there is a difference I would expect it to be very small. Now of course there will be a bigger difference when you compile it under Linux, for an entirely different platform or in -say- debug mode. But for that you have different compile time #define-s anyway so you can do #ifdef win32 define INTERNAL_MEMORY 400 #endif #ifdef OS2 define INTERNAL_MEMORY 600 #endif ... Don't you think that would work ? Regards, Georg On August 06, 2002 at 10:31:19, Robert Hyatt wrote: > > >There is a problem with this. How can a program know its "base memory" >requirement? This is a bit controlled by the compiler. And by the operating >system. For example, do you have a shared C library or do you eat up all that >memory for yourself when you load the program? > >This can actually be very complicated. Particularly when some might think >that such a command should reflect the size of memory on their machine, which >would be a disaster... >On August 06, 2002 at 03:28:04, Georg v. Zimmermann wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>suggestion for a new engine pseudo-standart command like "hash": "mem". >>For example "mem 64" should tell the engine to use 64MB in total. Which means if >>it uses 16MB for internal structures, 2MB for tablebase stuff, 2MB for learning, >>it has 44MB left for pawn hash and normal hash table which it might distribute >>as it wishes. >> >>Advantages: >>- easier for users >>- fairer engine-matches, everyone gets the same ammount of memory, eg. you get >>rewarded for using small internal structure. >> >> >> >>Current situation is this, as Mr. Zipproth summarized in another thread: >> >>It is not possible to tell an engine how much memory it shall use. It is only >>possible to tell an engine how much memory it may use for hashing. Aristarch >>does that correctly, which you can easiliy see by increasing the hash size by a >>certain amount - the used memory of Aristarch will increase by the same amount. >> >>Chess engines need memory not only for Hashing, but for lots of other things. >>This differs from engine to engine, I am sure that there are engines that need >>more base memory than Aristarch (32 MB).
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.