Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Windows (2000) questions

Author: Koundinya Veluri

Date: 03:23:10 10/19/02

Go up one level in this thread


On October 19, 2002 at 03:33:56, martin fierz wrote:

>On October 19, 2002 at 01:04:21, Koundinya Veluri wrote:
>
>>On October 19, 2002 at 00:39:19, martin fierz wrote:
>>
>>>On October 19, 2002 at 00:27:44, Koundinya Veluri wrote:
>>>
>>>>On October 18, 2002 at 18:43:15, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On October 18, 2002 at 18:35:32, martin fierz wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>so your book doesn't fit into your memory? wow, that thing must be huge! or
>>>>>>maybe it's just that i'm spoiled with my GB-machine :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>On my machine it does, but I don't want to make the assumption it
>>>>>will on all machines, so the code uses fseek/fread/fwrite.
>>>>>
>>>>>I have 768M RAM. The book is 16M, the PGN is 153M. Windows is
>>>>>*continously* busy with the disk and my program is getting <5%
>>>>>CPU time. That's redicolous.
>>>>
>>>>If your pgn is too fragmented, that would explain the heavy disk access. Try
>>>>defragmenting it. I've built books from some huge pgn files that were much
>>>>larger than my ram and still had no problems. Even disabling caching completely
>>>>shouldn't slow the program down that much. Probably your pgn file is fragmented
>>>>on your windows partition and isn't fragmented on your linux partition.
>>>>
>>>>Koundinya
>>>
>>>if his book generator is doing what i think it should be doing (reading in one
>>>PGN file after another, and writing the book to disk from time to time), then
>>>the read operation is negligible compared to the write of 16MB (which is what he
>>>says his book file size is).
>>>there is no way that reading games from HD is going to take any time at all -
>>>remember, GCP says he is only doing a few 10 games/s, and that kind of lousy
>>>performance cannot be due to harddisk reading, however fragmented it is.
>>>
>>>aloha
>>>  martin
>>
>>Although I admit that I have no idea what his book builder is doing, I don't
>>agree that reading 153 MB of formatted text data is negligible compared to
>>writing 16 MB of unformatted binary data, especially since the program has to
>>wait for each read operation to complete while it doesn't have to wait for a
>>write operation to complete. I can't find another reason for that much disk
>>access, but I assume it's not the writes that are clogging up because they can
>>easily be cached while the reads cannot. You're probably right though that 10
>>games/s is too slow for only fragmentation to affect.
>>
>>Koundinya
>
>as far as i understand it, he is reading the 153MB once, but writing the 16MB
>multiple (thousands of!) times. that's why i said the read was negligible.
>
>aloha
>  martin

Oh I misunderstood that. Now I see what's going on.

Koundinya



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.