Author: Michael Henderson
Date: 10:07:22 09/22/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 22, 2004 at 05:10:56, martin fierz wrote: >On September 21, 2004 at 17:36:47, Stuart Cracraft wrote: > >>Hi -- this past weekend I switched from single-tier replace >>always to two-tier place 1st tier in 2nd if incoming position >>is searched to a >= depth than currently stored at hash entry >>and store incoming position in 1st tier, otherwise always replace >>2nd tier if depth is. >[snip] > >i use only one hashtable in my program. whenever i tried using 2 tables, my >results were worse. i tried this many times, because everybody here says it's >better to use 2 tables. i never got it working, and decided to stick with 1 >table, as it is much simpler overall. > >IIRC dieter buerssner also mentioned that for him 1 table worked just as well as >2 tables. > >as others have said, if you want to benchmark this you'll have to use longer >searches - and to do that you should use a different test than WAC, i suggest >using ECMGCP, that is much tougher and more suited for longer searches. you >could also artificially create lots of replacements by making the hashtable(s) >really small - but i'm not sure that that will give you a relevant result... > >cheers > martin What replacement strategy do you use for the 1 table? Michael
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.