Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 20:00:57 06/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 16, 2003 at 21:27:07, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On June 16, 2003 at 19:48:58, Bob Durrett wrote: > >> >>I do not know whether or not this is a new idea. Whether it is or not, does it >>have any merit? >> >>Idea: Variable Hash Table size >> >>Someone said it is possible to have a hash table size too large, and sometimes >>too small. > > >But I don't think they were implying this was a problem *during* a game, but >rather *between* games such as for example a 1-minute bullet game using a >reasonably sized table followed by a 40/120 game that could make good use of a >larger table. > >A variable size hash table is not for free. You retain the O(1) performance >metrics, but it will still cost you some speed. It also will make the program >more complex and who needs that when there is really no payoff? Thanks for your comments. My interest in a chess engine is solely for using it as a tool to help with post-mortem analyses of games. If there is no payoff in that situation, I am not interested. Currently, I set my hash table size to the largest allowable integer power of two. That seems right? Bob D. > > >> >>Why not let the program decide? The operator may, or may not, wish to specify >>an absolute maximum size, but otherwise, the program itself would choose it's >>table size. >> >>The idea is that the table size could change during an individual game or >>analysis line. >> >>Bob D.
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.