On 01/03/2013 06:54 PM, Gregor Cramer wrote > as the developer of Scidb I like to answer to some points. Not that I know which is correct, but did you mean THE devloper, or the principal developer? > Yes, ChessBase is designed for huge database, and Scid/Scidb is > definitively not designed for huge database. More than 1.5 million > games in a database is not recommended for Scid/Scidb. ChessBase is > ChessBase, and Scidb will not be ChessBase, Scidb will be Scidb (not > a fork of Scid as well!). Scid/Scidb provides some functionality which > ChessBase cannot provide, for example the very fast position search > (ChessBase is working with memory mapping, no chance; furthermore > ChessBase has to decrypt his game data!). The user has to decide what > he wants, and if Gerd likes to work with huge database then ChessBase > is the primary choice. But if the user is only working with > specialized databases (only the opening repertoire he is usually > playing, for example) he may prefer the features of Scid/Scidb. I am quite surprised! I use Scid with absolutely no problems with a database (the big one from Opening Master) of 6+ million games! I admit that my machine is a strong one (8 core at 3.0Ghz, 16Ghz RAM, fast busses, Raid 0, Ubuntu 12.04), but even so, that statement surprises me. If someone else had said that, I would have accused him of underestimating Scid.
I would be curious to know the experience of others. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Master HTML5, CSS3, ASP.NET, MVC, AJAX, Knockout.js, Web API and much more. Get web development skills now with LearnDevNow - 350+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft MVPs and experts. SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122812 _______________________________________________ Scid-users mailing list Scid-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scid-users
