Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 13:56:10 04/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 30, 2004 at 16:49:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 30, 2004 at 16:25:29, Eugene Nalimov wrote: > >>On April 30, 2004 at 16:24:39, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On April 30, 2004 at 14:42:29, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On April 30, 2004 at 13:44:17, Ingo Bauer wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 30, 2004 at 13:36:44, Ingo Bauer wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 30, 2004 at 09:53:01, Karl-Johan Olsen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>btw. it's in the classical interface... >>>>>> >>>>>>Hi >>>>>> >>>>>>I never checked this and can't at the moment (will later) but it is completly >>>>>>useless. 64 is more than enough, let the OS do the caching job! >>>>>> >>>>>>Bye >>>>>>Ingo >>>>> >>>>>OK, I could not wait: >>>>> >>>>>CPU0: AuthenticAMD x86 Family 6 Model 10 Stepping 0 2505 MHz >>>>>GUI: Tablebases with 5 pieces found! [Cache: 999 MB + internal 13.67 MB] >>>>>Engine: Shredder 8 (64 MB) >>>>>by Stefan Meyer-Kahlen >>>>> 4/04 0:00 +M11 1.Ne6 Rg6 (95) 5 >>>>>best move: Nc7-e6 time: 0:00.016 min n/s: 7.687 CPU 93.7% n/s(1CPU): 8.203 >>>>>nodes: 123 TB: 174 >>>>> >>>>>There seems to be a limitation of 999 MB for the TBs Cache, and the 5 Pcs at >>>>>least are working fine. But again 999 is completly useless! The OS is doing the >>>>>caching job allready. Use a bit more for Engine-Hash and let 100-200 MB Memory >>>>>free for the OS. Done! >>>>> >>>>>Ingo >>>>> >>>>>Ingo >>>> >>>>The OS might cache it Ingo, but won't decompress it for you which also takes >>>>quite some time. A bigger EGTB cache works better than letting the OS find the >>>>golden coins. >>>> >>>>Best regards, >>>>Vincent >>> >>>Current egtb cache caches compressed blocks. So this is a moot point. >> >>Unfortunately no. That is in my "TODO" list. >> >>Thanks, >>Eugene > >So you are caching decompressed stuff? IE a buffer to read into, then >decompress into the cache??? However, the original point is still valid, that >this is not a big issue. Decompression compared to I/O is tiny. Unfortunately no. >> >>>Decompression is _not_ the bottleneck. From actual testing rather than >>>guessing...
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.