Author: Richard Pijl
Date: 00:50:23 01/07/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 2004 at 16:18:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 06, 2004 at 15:32:49, David Rasmussen wrote: > >>I just got my wish for a thesis subject granted. I will write about >>parallelizing a chess program, or more specifically, the alpha beta like >>algorithm in a chess program. So my hobby (Chezzz) has now become my "job". >> >>But the precise details of the project are not ready yet. I will have to decide >>what exactly to focus on. One idea is to implement several forms of >>parallelizing and test their relative effeciency: with and without Young >>Brothers Wait, that scheme where two threads are searching the same, but they >>benefit because they share hash, AABAB or something? >> >>Those of you who have fiddled with parallelizing: Do you have any ideas about >>what to implement or examing etc. ? >> >>/David > >I don't recall the acronym either, but I think it might be ABBADA, and I would >forget about it personally. Depending on serendipitous communication thru the >transposition table to make the search faster leaves me cold. It would be nice >if it were that easy, but alas... ABDADA is nice if you want to have SMP capabilities fast, without having to rewrite major parts of your program. Adding SMP capabilities took me just a few days, then a few weeks more for testing and rooting out problems. With some adaptations I got a fair speedup, for the amount of work I put in it (about 1.5x). I agree that if given the time a proper splitting method is preferable though. Richard. >Best approach is a YBW-like approach, ie something like what I do in Crafty. >If you don't at least to YBW, your search overhead will go up. The DTS >approach I did in Cray Blitz had a touch of YBW, but it was better overall, >but also _way_ more complicated.
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.