I get it. But ssh access is a barrier to participation. On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Don Dailey <[email protected]> wrote:
> Probably the easiest thing for me is to run the programs via remote shell > (ssh) using my own self-tester. I don't remember how my self-tester works > but my chess and shogi self-tester multiplexes games, so it's a trivial > setup, except that I would have to make the modification to restrict the > number of connections to any particular machine (and this would need to be > configurable.) > > The reason for this is that my tester(s) assume everything is running on > one machine (and I specify how many simultaneous games to allow) but if a > given player has not played as many games as another player, it would > schedule several games with that one player. But it would not be good if > 20 instances of "[email protected] /home/joe/bin/zen -level 10000" needed > to be scheduled since they would all be running on the same machine. If > it were not for that, I would not need to make ANY modifications to the > tester, I could just configure each player using that form assuming I set > up the ssh keys properly and have an account on foobar.com. > > Another problem with the autotester is that it only knows how to play round > robin matches, but that is not a big problem since I can partition the test > easily enough. What I would do is run a full round robin just long enough > to get reasonably stable ratings, then based on the ratings I could > partition the players into separate sections by strength. And from time to > time I would re-calibrate the ratings and change the partitions sizes in > order that all the players have good interaction are not playing in isolated > rating pools. > > I have not looked too closely but if my go tester does not multiplex games > I can still simply run several instances of it. I just want to find a > setup that does not require too much babysitting on my part. > > Don > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Michael Williams < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> You could write a new server that uses a CGOS-compatible interface so that >> the CGOS clients can be used. The server would always match-up two engines >> from the same IP address that start with the same name prefix. And would >> only run one game at a time for that IP address and prefix. On the client >> side, you would run several instances for each CPU core, but only two of >> them would be in a game at the same time (against each other). >> >> Or something like that. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Don Dailey <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 6:25 PM, Jacques Basaldúa <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> 1. Perhaps Erica may be of help. 10 months ago it >>>> won the Olympiad, so it should be strong enough. If >>>> Aja is so kind to let us copy of the binary. >>>> >>>> 2. I can donate cpu, but it will be better in 3 weeks >>>> when I return from a short holiday and have a new >>>> machine more. >>>> >>>> 3. Maybe the idea of using a special CGOS makes it >>>> easier for everybody. >>>> >>> >>> I thought of CGOS, but CGOS is a terrible solutions for this specific >>> thing because it would have to be configured for a really long time control >>> in order to avoid time forfeits. But it will not schedule a round until >>> all games are complete from the previous round so most computers would be >>> idle most of the time. It would be better to have a system that keeps all >>> computers busy all of the time. >>> >>> On the other hand, that is a pretty simple way to do it but don't know >>> if we would have the patience for it ... >>> >>> The previous study was good because it represented a huge amount of CPU >>> effort, it was not just running a few games for a couple of days but it was >>> thousands of games played on 40 or 50 cores over a period of weeks. I >>> don't think CGOS would be good for this. >>> >>> I'm still thinking about how it might be done without a huge amount of >>> effort on my part - I would really like to do this study. >>> >>> Let me ask the group this question: How do you run automated testing >>> under CGOS conditions (other than using CGOS?) What tools are available >>> that work under Linux? >>> >>> Don >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Jacques. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ______________________________**_________________ >>>> Computer-go mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/**mailman/listinfo/computer-go<http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Computer-go mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
