Everyone, At startup, I simply had Dr. Eliza cycle through the heavily used part of the DB, so that it would run in RAM except for unusual access. Of course, its demo DB now easily fits into RAM. VM paging was a MUCH worse problem than is DB access. I suspect that unless you lock the code into RAM, that this may will forever be the case because less-used routines (e.g. exception handlers) will get pushed out of RAM by the DB engine's scramble for buffer space, which of course you can limit by tweaking the DB engine.
Also, has any one here looked at using Flash Disks for DB? Vista now puts VM onto any available flash drives to gain performance. On 4/17/08, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That's true as of now, but let's think one or two steps further: Do > > you really think a mature AGI's (say with 3-6 year-old human > > intelligence) KB can reside in RAM, entirely? > > > > Yes. RAM is *HUGE*. Intelligence is *NOT*. Hmm, thinking on the keyboard... ~100E9 computing cells with ~50K inputs each, of which ~200 are active. One theory is that you would only have to carry the active inputs, plus some fraction of the inactive inputs while you watched for things to happen to make them active. Let's say that we must track ~1E3 inputs, for a total of 100E12 or one hundred trillion inputs. We could use fractal means to generate the original configuration (as biological brains probably do), very low precision arithmetic with statistical rounding, etc., which would reduce each input to just a few bytes to maintain, say ~10. This makes a total of 1E15 or one quadrillion bytes to represent a simulated human's instantaneous state of construction. An entire checkpoint would take little more, because it would only include in addition the electrical state of each of the 100E9 cells. Note however, that the *FUNCTIONAL* state would only be 1/5 of this estimate because 4/5 of the represented inputs are presently inactive, for a total of "only" 100 terabytes. Note that ~90% of those 100E9 cells are slow-responding glial cells, so while the state is large, the computational requirements may be well short of a petaflop. Of course, this makes a LOT of assumptions that no one has yet bothered to confirm in the laboratory, and I do NOT want to ignite an "estimates war", so I invite constructive comments from anyone with more recent data than I have. Steve Richfield ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=101455710-f059c4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
