So you are saying that use disk memory for this?
This could be pretty deceiving if most of your reads and writes are
cached. What happens when your tree gets much bigger than available
memory?
- Don
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Michael Williams
<michaelwilliam...@gmail.com <mailto:michaelwilliam...@gmail.com>> wrote:
In my system, I can retrieve the children of any node at a rate of
about 100k nodes/sec.
And I can save nodes at a rate of over 1M nodes/sec (this is much
faster because in my implementation, the operation is sequential on
disk).
Those numbers are from 6x6 testing.
Don Dailey wrote:
This is probably a good solution. I don't believe the memory
has to be very fast at all because even with light playouts you
are doing a LOT of computation between memory accesses.
All of this must be tested of course. In fact I was
considering if disk memory could not be utilized as a kind of
cache. The secret would be to store complete trees in disk
memory, trees that are not likely to be utilized but can be
utilized in a pinch. The tree store and retrieved must
outweigh by a large factor the amount of time spent creating the
tree in the first place in order for this to pay off.
My guess is that this is impractical, but it's fun to think
about how it might be done. I'm not sure how to do it without
having a caching nightmare.
- Don
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Michael Williams
<michaelwilliam...@gmail.com
<mailto:michaelwilliam...@gmail.com>
<mailto:michaelwilliam...@gmail.com
<mailto:michaelwilliam...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
Don Dailey wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Michael Williams
<michaelwilliam...@gmail.com
<mailto:michaelwilliam...@gmail.com>
<mailto:michaelwilliam...@gmail.com
<mailto:michaelwilliam...@gmail.com>>
<mailto:michaelwilliam...@gmail.com
<mailto:michaelwilliam...@gmail.com>
<mailto:michaelwilliam...@gmail.com
<mailto:michaelwilliam...@gmail.com>>>> wrote:
I have a trick ;)
I am currently creating MCTS trees of over a billion
nodes on
my 4GB
machine.
Ok, I'll bite. What is your solution?
I use an SSD. There are many details, of course. But it's
still in
the works and I'm still making lots of changes and
adjustments. I
seem to be able to "solve" (there are lots of definitions)
6x6 Go in
that when I use a komi of 3.5, it is unable to find a winning
line
for white and when I use 4.5, it is unable to find a
winning line
for black.
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
<mailto:computer-go@computer-go.org>
<mailto:computer-go@computer-go.org
<mailto:computer-go@computer-go.org>>
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org <mailto:computer-go@computer-go.org>
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org <mailto:computer-go@computer-go.org>
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
