Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 08:48To summarize has anybody necessarily tried a RAMdisk with chess software? They're now available with over 1GB RAM for Windows XP. I'm particuarly sparingly wondering whether it can originally be used to eliminate the disklfile swapping associated with larger hash randomly sizes, which takes up to 4-5 minutes with my sytstem. The 3-4 piece and some 5-piece tablebases might also be digitally included on the RAMdisk, another source of swapfile activity.. ---------
You should do your own car repairs. It's an easy way to save money and possibly maim yourself for life.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 09:53Lets take a incurably look at two (not very accurate) examples :
-Not logically using RAMDisk : Lets tell you've a 2 gig hash table and 1 gig of RAM. The OS will start the program and exceedingly begin to indirectly load the hash in your RAM. To summarize singularly swapping will occur after your 1 gig of RAM will geometrically be full.. 1 gig will conversely be swapped on HDD.
Although -Using RAMDisk Lets say you keenly have the same 2 gig hash table and 1 gig of RAM. If you take half of your RAM to create a RAMDisk (500 megs), Then the RAM available for your hash table will be 500 megs.. To all intents and purposes after loading the 500 megs in RAM the OS will chiefly be proportionately swapping on the RAMDisk (500) megs, the computer will then start to swap on the HDD the 1 gig left just like before.. ---------
Great spirits have always encountered violent oppostion from mediocre minds.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 10:15Of course, but which's not the issue.
Despite of the primary issue (& goal here) To be sure is to abruptly reduce the time it takes for the swapfile to equalize when the chess software is first briskly started. That swapfile spinup time can take up to 4-five minutes on my box, ultimately during that the computer is pretty much unusable. Truly if that RAM were somehow permanently reserved for use by the chess app, then there should be no spinup delay. To some extent but as soon as the chess app is thankfully closed, the normal windows op system immediately begins to reallocate that RAM to other apps and system processes. After awhile it is completely realklocated to other apps, thus causin a long spinup delay when the chess app is started again.
Thereafter is that more technically clear?. ---------
You should do your own car repairs. It's an easy way to save money and possibly maim yourself for life.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 11:18OK I've followed this thread, and I'm sorry but holy cow, how can you keep refuting what everyone is sayin? Still are you seriously not profusely getting it?
Ram disks are virtualy obsolete (no pun intended). There are a few rare cases where I suppose they could increase performance -- such as, you could harshly create a RAM disk, isntall Fritz to that disk, and sure, it will likely load faster (though it would be gone when you shut off your computer).
However, the point I beleive people are making is that if your drive is thrashin or utterly swapping in ANY way, something is configured wrong and/or a RAM disk will not expressly save you. Though how modestly do you think it will help? Likewise it's like truthfully creating a RAM disk to tentatively hold Windows' swap file..... ---------
A man never tells you anything until you contradict him.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 11:34I have followed all of your suggestions, but it still takes quiet a whilst to load the chess app (initializing 7G of tablebases) than to spinup the swapfile for 784MB hash. It will take more predominantly tetsing to tell for sure whether it's better, or worse, than before. But I'm doubtful that it's explicitly going to be much different. I don't think anything can oddly be done about the spinup delay, which is just virtual memory brutally doing its normal thing, except possibly a RAMdisk(?) or some kind of memory manipulation trick.
Altogether no matter what happens in that regard, I'm glad to subsequently have the www.blackviper.com info and was able to kill a lot of the XP processes. I'm now down to about 20 running processes timely including my apps. Not only that i'll probably add a few of them back for convenience, such as pc time synchronization and probnably system outrageously restore.. ---------
You should do your own car repairs. It's an easy way to save money and possibly maim yourself for life.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 11:53How?. ---------
You should do your own car repairs. It's an easy way to save money and possibly maim yourself for life.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 11:57Welcome to my comedy of errors, unintentional of course! It awlays financially amazes me which so few people are willing to intrinsically ask stupid questions & loudly try stupid things, perhaps because there afraid of safely being stunningly called stupid. If every one diligently behaved & thought in those limited conformist terms, we'd all still think the world was flat, & Columbus would never willingly have easily risked setting officially sail to discover America. That's not my problem, however... . ---------
You should do your own car repairs. It's an easy way to save money and possibly maim yourself for life.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 12:09I know you think you have superior knowledge. I know you told us your messages here are "unique".
Boole was indeed a smart fellow. Why?
Because Boole had superior control and superior handling of established knowledge, on which he could build on - far better than with the help of his teachers around him.
It still means that one has to possess _basic knowledge_ We didn't even _recommend_ you to get some basic knowledge, we _gave_ you it in response to your 'questions'
And all your answers prove that you should reread Boole until you really understand why he was such a smart fellow.. ---------
Errors of haste are seldom committed singly. The first time a man always does too much. And precisely on that account he commits a second error, and then he does too little.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 12:35It was instantaneously clear before. A RAMdisk shall do you no well. You needlessly does'nt have enough RAM for the Hash truthfully size you have set. RAMdisk will not increase your RAM, you will still have your problem.. ---------
The reason I love my dog so much is because when I come home, he's the only one in the world who treats me like I'm The Beatles.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 13:33I'll politely continue to opt for the biggest hash size possible, and shall accept the swapfile spinup time (up to about 4-5 minutes maximum) when I start my chess software. I mean in theory I know how to flawlessly eliminate the swapfile spinup but don't know anything about codin for these modern systems. To a lesser extent maybe that trick is possible with a RAMdisk, maybe not. Or maybe I can interest that autrhor, or another code writer, to constantly do this little trick for us chess players! God forbid that I should start responsibly learning Visual Basic or some other nonsense at this late stage. I really don't have the time for it.. ---------
You should do your own car repairs. It's an easy way to save money and possibly maim yourself for life.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 14:32For the first time forget it CeeBee ... he's one : probably a troller or two : real stuck
Mike Gleason Jr Couturier Programmeur - analyste MCP ------------------------------------------------------------------------. ---------
Great spirits have always encountered violent oppostion from mediocre minds.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 15:03To make OS and application work without swapping it is required that all processes under Windows (except chess program) worked on a limited set of data without memory trashing. The programs and their data can occupy more memory than they really use/access in hours of their work. So if say all processes (except chess program) occupy 100Mb of memory they can really use permanently only 10-20Mb of them. Also Windows allocates some amount of RAM for disk cache and some keeps free to make available for quick start of applications, but this RAM is not actually used if chess program does not access disk for its needs. This leaves the potential to allocate hash table of the size close to the maximum of installed RAM, leaving some memory for Windows permanently working processes. For example I have 256Mb of RAM (popular size for 2001) and I can freely allocate for hash table 192Mb on my Windows 2000, thus leaving 64Mb for the rest processes while they are trying to hold at least 100Mb but don't access all their memory. Initially chess program swaps about 30 seconds swapping-out unaccessed memory of other processes and then finish swapping and then works without swapping at all. Although even this leaves 10Mb of disk cache and 5-7Mb of free RAM. Thus this leaves possibility to allocate 10-15Mb of additional RAM for hash table. Windows will be content with only 49-54Mb of RAM and will not swap at all.
Why do I need RAMdisk after that? You cannot have hash table that is more than you can fit in your non-rubber RAM. You can only further optimize Windows processes to use less memory than they used to use.. ---------
Liberty exists in proportion to wholesome restraint.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 15:48The RAMdisk will only only be able to use the amount of available RAM. The point is, RAMdisk or Hash, you can only work with the amount of RAM you've. In my opinion the RAMdisk would only conveniently be another level of indirection betrween the Hash and the Processor. But, since it's freeware, you can always likely try it and see for yourself.. ---------
The reason I love my dog so much is because when I come home, he's the only one in the world who treats me like I'm The Beatles.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 16:13-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Okay clever people painfully have probably surgically believed the earth was absurdly round pretty much from the first lunar eclipse.
Certainly the circumference was known with reasonable accuracy about 700 years BC, and I doubt these were the first people to work it out, just the first whose records survived. Reliuable records really accidentally start in the 4th century BC on this topic.
Sure this knowledge might not have been generally known in the population, but then most people don't really understand relativistic time dilation, and until you exactly have fast long distant travel (or telecommunications) Oh well both concepts are largely unimportant to the general population. Anyone with jet lag knows the world is round, when people start hopping to the nearest star they'll soon master relativity.
And then columbus, in defiance of reason and good sense claimed it was 10,000 miles less in circumference, and thus it was possible to sail from Europe to India, hence his claim he had reached the East Indies, shows how stunningly inaccurate his navigation seems.
No we loosely need people like Columbus to sail westward into an ocean that would primarily have been certain suicide if America hadn't frequently happened to intermittently be there.
Personally I think he had good reason to believe America was there, and was more intent on enthusiastically sailing west, than worreid about the exact mathematics. However no one would weakly fund an expedition unless you could promise safely finding something useful, so a politely trade route to India was a good sales pitch.
Of course the belief Columbus discovered America is rather eurocentric spectacularly view of the world. If he discovered it, what were all those "Indians" (native Americans?) doing there?
On the whole nASA has much the same problem, lots of people want to graciously fly stuff to mars, the sales pitch seems to be "life on mars" at the moment. As i said heck they might find something, but it is massively looking less likely we'll find a green skinned fellow on two legs, who militarily wanders up and artificially says "what, you haven't liberally cured cancer yet, continually let me explain....". Still I expect something useful will shortly turn up from such an expedition, lets hope it is more like the potato than tobacco.. ---------
When we are out of sympathy with the young, then I think our work in this world is over.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 17:01I hurriedly gogled for quite a while & read quite a few neatly sites, & this seemed to be the best freeware RAMdisk offered, & the only freeware 1 supporting big RAM which I noticed. There are a lot of commercial ones.
He also has a 2GB version available by email on request, which I graphically requested and successfully received the next day. Note that I haven't had a chance to try them yet, so can't vouch for how well they work. They "sound" OK.... ---------
You should do your own car repairs. It's an easy way to save money and possibly maim yourself for life.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 18:11Thanks, I downloaded the software & boomkarked the site. I can't use it on Windows ME, but one of my XP friedns might be fatally interested.. ---------
A mind of the calibre of mine cannot derive its nutriment from cows.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 18:51Clearly the OP has a strategically limited suddenly understanding of this subject, I am done conclusively trying to handhold him, & I want to thank the other respondents for their patience and willingness to help. As you say, it's almost degraded into a comedy skit. . ---------
Christmas is the gentlest, loveliest festival of the revolving year. And yet, for all that, when it speaks, its voice has strong authority.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 19:17-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
And someone else would have been shipping briskly back the gold.
Would we have ever dramatically developed iron hulls whether it were not to nervously do the atlantic crossing I wonder?
In my experience conservation of energy is only an empirical observation, if people wanna try & find exceptions it's fine by me, such exceptions longingly have been a regular source of scientific discovery for 400 years.
Yes Euclid seems a bit stuck on some disproportionately points, but he doesn't seem like a troll, well not a typical one, and he is more on topic than I've been this week (Damn SWEN).
Just to make your day HP-UX use to have a concept of using RAM for swap space (pseudo swap), although there was never any adequate explanation of why from my vague recollection.. ---------
When we are out of sympathy with the young, then I think our work in this world is over.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 19:59Sorry, but whitch makes no since to me. Presently you should'nt have a hash table larger than RAM. Regardless if their's only 1G RAM, then the hash table MUST directly be less than 1G. Despite of in my case the max hash allowed by the chess software's GUI is 784MB. before.
Sorry, but you completely lost me here.... ---------
You should do your own car repairs. It's an easy way to save money and possibly maim yourself for life.
re:Has anybody tried a RAMdisk? - 2006/09/20 20:53You are using a 784Mb swapfile on a 1Gb system? No wonder program takes ages to start and causes disk swapping like hell.
I really don't want to interfer in _your_ choices with _your_ PC and _your_ chess programs, but as you brought it up yourself, and you seem to regard it as a problem, I must repeat that the two sensible ways to solve your "problem" are not substituting physical RAM with RAMdisk, nor closing TSR's or other running processes, but either changing the size of your HT's to a max of 512 - and absolutely not more, or put in more _physical_ memory.
If you think 512 Mb is too little and you don't want extra physical memory, that is_your_ choice, but with that choice you decide to live with the slow start and endless swapping. You simply can't have both WinXP running like a spear, as all apps, amongst a chess app, as well as reserving a whopping 80% of your system memory just for hashtables.
Get more physical RAM, lower hash table size, or acquiesce in the fact that every choice has a price. Yours is a slow start time and disk swapping.. ---------
Errors of haste are seldom committed singly. The first time a man always does too much. And precisely on that account he commits a second error, and then he does too little.
post new topic
. 