2 ms·
Take a look at their financials and $1500 for SSDs would not be out of place. They have yearly expenses for more than $500.000 https://docs.google.com/spreads
by silvestrov 2y ago
Take a look at their financials and $1500 for SSDs would not be out of place.
They have yearly expenses for more than $500.000
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Si3PMUJGR9KrpE5lngSkHLJKJkb0ZuI4/preview https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Si3PMUJGR9KrpE5lngSk...
Seems really weird to be using harddrives when they already have expenses like that.
- Timshel 2y agoLooks like rented stuff to me you can't just add drives ... And while 500k is a lot maybe they can do so much with it because they do not just throw $1500 in drives at every problem.
- Out_of_Characte 2y agoThe reason is buried in another article "WDL tables (.rtbw) store the outcome of positions, e.g. if a position is winning. An engine will use this very frequently to decide which endgames to aim for. WDL tables should be stored on the fastest disk (preferably SSD) you have." "DTZ tables (.rtbz) tell the engine how to finish the endgame once it is on the board. They are optional, but required to reliably convert complicated endings." Seems reasonable to put the WDL table on the SSD for better engine performance. I do understand not choosing SSD's. The number of lookups for positions always remains the same per user per game. Yet the tablebase is growing more than exponentially. https://lichess.org/@/lichess/blog/7-piece-syzygy-tablebases-are-complete/W3WeMyQA https://lichess.org/@/lichess/blog/7-piece-syzygy-tablebases...
- lukhas 2y agoAs mentionned elsewhere, we're renting most of our infra from OVH, and paying, monthly, for 40TB of SSDs or NVMes would simply explode our yearly budget. Source: am président of the lichess charity (and also one of the sysadmins)