Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 03:58:07 09/26/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 26, 2003 at 03:03:14, Koundinya Veluri wrote: >On September 24, 2003 at 15:04:36, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>In a typical modern machine we can expect something like 512 MB of system >>memory. Assuming hash entries are of power two, that means an always power 2 >>sized table could not be able to use more than 256 MB, or more generally half of >>the system memory. I'd call that a waste of resources. >> > >I use two main hashtables and two small hashtables, all with power-2 sizes. So >then I can use 256+128 for the main hashtables, and 16+16 for the smaller >hashtables. Then I'm using 384 megs. I can make many combinations of these sizes >too, so that most of available memory will be used. > >Because of this, I don't think wasting memory is an issue at all with using >power-2 number of entries. I think there are two downsides to doing this. One, you get a more complex code. Not that this needs to be an issue, just an observation. I fancy simple things now, unless there is a really big win in doing it complicated. A theoretical 1% win seems not that big to me. Two, you need to probe around in several tables instead of just one table, and wouldn't this incur a huge latency penalty? -S. >Regards, >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.