Author: James T. Walker
Date: 15:59:21 06/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 26, 1999 at 10:28:07, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 26, 1999 at 05:34:58, Lin Harper wrote: > >> On reading posts re: optimum hash table sizes for various >> programs and time settings for them, I could'nt help wonder >> why these programs don't auto adjust their own hash size for >> the situation they find themselves in as the game progresses. >> For example, during the opening phase hash is not needed,so >> the program could only activate the hash when the book runs out. >> As the endgame approaches and transpositions become more likely >> then bigger hash would presumably be an advantage, the hash size >> could adjust itself upwards. >> This must have been all thought of by clever programmers before >> and rejected for some reason. Perhaps it's just not possible to >> do it or the benefit would be negligible? >> Just a thought, guys. > >1. It is not possible to determine total memory on a computer when they >support virtual memory. And if you make the hash table too large, performance >will die. > ************* Perhaps you are referring to Crafty and the fact it can be ported to many different environments? Every time I start my Chessbase programs(Fritz,Hiarcs,Junior,Nimzo) the GUI reports how much memory I have and how much is already configured for hash tables. So this information is available in Windows98 somewhere. Jim Walker ************* >2. changing the size during the game is also not really great, becaue when >you change it you would have to stop and 'relocate' all the entries, or else >clear it. Neither of which is worth the time spent.
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.