Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 15:36:08 02/03/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 03, 2005 at 13:57:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 03, 2005 at 13:37:09, Peter Skinner wrote: > >>On February 03, 2005 at 11:47:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>Nor do you know anyone that said someone did. That's your lack of reading >>>comprehension, not anything else. who exactly said someone uses "all" of them? >> >>I have used them all at one point, but just like you I have run out of hard >>drive space in my beast. Now all total I use 523.71gb of tablebases when playing >>online. I use Hiarcs and Crafty, and I believe those are the only two that >>support 6man bases at this time. >> >>The start up time for each program is considerable. In fact just last night I >>saw a position where Hiarcs thought it was up +2.35 then the 6man tbs clicked in >>and suddenly it found a mate in 42 moves. I will find the exact game and >>position and post it here. >> >>>>In fact i don't even know anyone who has them all besides you. But well, you >>>>don't even know how to back them up seemingly :) >> >>I have them all. Either on my hard drives, or backed up on DVD. I do have them >>all though. Just ask my provider who cried over the bandwidth I used :) >> >>I downloaded roughly 10.5GB nightly until I had them all. Depending on the ftp's >>speed, I seen a high of downloading 38.94GB in one night. >> >>Peter > > >For the record, crafty takes about 25 seconds to "start up" on my dual xeon, >with nearly 600 gigs of "stuff" in the TB folder. About 500 gigs is on 146gig >10K U320 scsi drives, the rest is on 36gig 15K U320 scsi drives. I have 3x146 >in raid-0 (striping for performance) and 3x36 in raid-0 as well.. Bob considering all the problems you had in the past, why not use Raid5. It is the same READ speed like raid0, it can stripe too, but if a harddrive fails then your entire RAID array isn't complete dead. Raid5 is pretty safe way to do things... Note you lose 1 disk with RAID5. So getting for example a s-ata array of 8 cheap disks of say 300GB offers higher reliability than raid0-scsi and is a lot cheaper than those U320 disks. READ speed of U320 is of course higher than s-ata ever will get. Though a 400 dollar raid card hands down delivers > 400MB there. Note that there is also raid5 for scsi. >I don't consider that unacceptable...
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.