Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:52:01 09/03/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 03, 2003 at 02:24:00, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On September 02, 2003 at 22:34:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>>Been working a year fulltime now :) >>> >> >>So? It took you over a year to get your parallel search working. It took >>me weeks. >> >>:) > >In all fairness, he did a full DTS implementation, including rewriting the >program to a nonrecursive search, while you took an easy way out. _I_ did the _original_ DTS implementation, don't forget. It didn't take me years. I started to work on it in March of 1987 and I finished my Ph.D. completely in August of 1988, which included months of testing to produce the data. > >Diep's parallel performance does seem to be better than what you and I are >getting. > >I wouldn't make that design decision for the common 2 or 4 way machines >you are most likely to end up working with, but given that he's now >working with 512, I'm sure it has payed off handsomely in the meantime. > >Likewise, optimizing a program for Opteron NUMA is a whole different animal >than optimizing it for a 512 CPU NUMA Sun Altix. > >I agree optimizing Crafty for the Opteron won't take an entire rewrite, >but please don't go claiming that 'NUMA-Crafty' will run well on any NUMA >machine. It _will_ "run on any NUMA machine." If you want to say it won't run well with 512 cpus, I agree. But then again, it won't run well on 512 CPUS if the machine is pure SMP either. The issues are different. However, Crafty _does_ have some stuff to make it run reasonably well on 32 cpu boxes. I've already done that. > >-- >GCP
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.