Author: John Merlino
Date: 13:30:00 04/03/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 03, 2005 at 15:27:31, pavel wrote: >On April 03, 2005 at 15:07:01, John Merlino wrote: > >>On April 03, 2005 at 12:41:04, pavel wrote: >> >>>On April 03, 2005 at 11:31:56, pavel wrote: >>> >>>>I have used all the CM versions since 6000. But my favourite one was CM9000. >>>>What do you guys think? >>>>There is something about CM10 I just don't like. I can't seem to understand what >>>>is it. It's probably the new look. Also the Database import (from PGN) function >>>>of CM9000 was much much (almost 10times) faster than CM10. >>>>I was trying to import a 1 million PGN games database into CM10 format. After >>>>leaving it working on it for more than 20 hours on a P4 2.66 it was barely 50% >>>>done. On comparison CM9 is crunching on the database, like it's on steroid. >>>> >>>>I never really fiddled with CM database features. I am looking for a Database >>>>that's extremely fast while doing positional search, at the same time the >>>>database is not too bloated. Scid is OK is this regard. It's kinda slow in a >>>>position search. And I hate the fact that it loads the whole database in the >>>>memory every time you open it; try opening a 4million game database in SCID when >>>>you have 750mb memory. PosBase is amazingingly fast but the database format is >>>>hugely bloated, even more than PGN format. And there seems to be a serious bug >>>>in the program. >>>> >>>>CM9 is the winner so far in terms of features that I am looking for. It also >>>>seems to avoid importing games that's already in the database. I am not sure if >>>>it's true. If it is the case. It would be an awesome feature. >>>> >>>>pavs >>> >>> >>>Does CM9 have a limitation of importing games from PGN files? It stopped at >>>300,000. >> >>To comment on both of your posts: >> >>I'm very surprised that CMX is slow in importing to the database. It is >>impossible that the Romanian team could have fiddled with the database code >>unless it is a completely new database format, rather than the old TASCBase code >>that CM6000-9000 had. More on that later. >> >>The only other way this could have happened (and it is probably more likely), is >>that some code for updating the new interface gets called with each imported >>game, causing a massive slowdown due to graphics issues. >> >>I have yet to see CMX, but I can understand how fans of the series may be a bit >>put off by the new interface. IMO, it WAS time for a change of scenery, but >>whether or not the Romanian team got it right on the first try will remain to be >>seen. I have heard mixed reviews, with some saying that they love the look of >>the new interface. >> >>But, back to the database. Yes, there is a limitation on the number of games in >>the database, but it has nothing to do with the actual NUMBER of games. It has >>to do with how different the games are from each other. If you made a database >>of only Sicilian Dragon games, I suspect you could fit close to 600K games in >>the database. If you try to import a PGN file with lots of bizarre and unique >>games, you are going to come up against the limit pretty quickly, although I'm >>surprised that you hit it at 300K. I've never seen it fail at less than 400K >>games. >> >>This limitation goes all the way back to the initial code (or, rather, >>LIBRARY)that we (then Mindscape) purchased from TASC for CM6000. Since Mindscape >>never owned the actual code for the database, we could not fix bugs in it. >>Perhaps we should have tried to buy it from TASC when they went out of business >>-- oh well. >> >>jm > > >Thanks JM for your quick reply. I was hoping that you would write something. > >Yes, you guessed it right. The Database format is differant. > >CM10 (size maybe differant because I may have added games to the original >database) > >----------------------------------------------------------- >04/01/2005 09:48 AM <DIR> . >04/01/2005 09:48 AM <DIR> .. >05/03/2004 06:03 PM 5,376 CMXDBase.dba >05/03/2004 06:03 PM 12,992 CMXDBase.dbc >05/03/2004 06:03 PM 71,900 CMXDBase.dbd >05/17/2004 05:16 PM 2,520 CMXDBase.dbe >03/12/2004 05:27 PM 32 CMXDBase.dbf >04/01/2005 09:47 AM 818,796 CMXDBase.dbg >04/01/2005 09:47 AM 42,436,400 CMXDBase.dbh >05/17/2004 05:17 PM 4,701,456 CMXDBase.dbj >05/03/2004 06:03 PM 234,496 CMXDBase.dbl >04/01/2005 09:47 AM 87,700,654 CMXDBase.dbm >05/03/2004 06:03 PM 49,408 CMXDBase.dbn >03/12/2004 05:28 PM 640 CMXDBase.dbo >04/01/2005 09:47 AM 11,480 CMXDBase.dbp >05/03/2004 06:03 PM 4,572 CMXDBase.dbr >05/03/2004 06:03 PM 130,752 CMXDBase.dbt >05/17/2004 05:17 PM 2,578,422 CMXDBase.dki >04/23/2004 05:54 PM 50,229 CMXDBase.dkm >04/23/2004 05:54 PM 1,172,010 CMXDBase.dkp >----------------------------------------------------------- > >CM9 format >(size maybe differant because I may have added games to the original database) > >----------------------------------------------------------- >04/03/2005 12:50 PM <DIR> . >04/03/2005 12:50 PM <DIR> .. >04/03/2005 12:51 PM 4,020 cm9000Base.tbd >04/03/2005 12:51 PM 77,477,761 cm9000Base.tbg >04/03/2005 12:51 PM 2,378,672 cm9000Base.tbi >04/03/2005 12:51 PM 2,146,176 cm9000Base.tbk >04/03/2005 12:50 PM 20,732 cm9000Base.tbn >04/03/2005 12:50 PM 173,824 cm9000Base.tbp >04/03/2005 12:50 PM 0 cm9000Base.tbt >----------------------------------------------------------- > >The exact number of games imported was 302775 >http://www.pavs.org/cm9.jpg > > >It's too bad that it has a limitation, because nowadays 300,000 games collection >is nothing IMO. > >I don't think CM10 has any limitation. But it takes way too much time. I will >try to later to see if it has any limitation. > >Thanks again. >pavs So, they made a new database format that is larger and slower than the original. :-) Is it worth it now that the maximum game limitation has been removed? For our average user, I would definitely say "no". jm
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.