Author: Tord Romstad
Date: 00:48:34 01/19/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2006 at 22:26:06, Jay Urbanski wrote: >On January 18, 2006 at 17:55:55, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>Executables are heavyweight processes that heavily consume resources and threads >>are lightweight processes which consume less resources. But a threaded server >>needs any global variables to have write-access gated with a critical section >>whereas a global in a spawned server has no effect (since each server is a >>single process running a single thread of execution). >> >>It is better, but much harder, to write a threaded chess engine. > > >Very true but with nearly all processor improvements in the immediate future >coming from more cores/threads - it will likely be worth the effort to bite the >bullet and learn to write good threaded code at some point. Why? Wouldn't a chess engine using multiple processes and shared memory be just as fast as a similar program with multiple threads on a computer with several CPUs (or CPUs with multiple cores)? I thought the engine using processes would just consume a bit more memory, and not have any significant disadvantages apart from that. I'm not saying that you are wrong, of course. I am totally ignorant about this subject, and I ask in order to learn more. Tord
This page took 0.01 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.