Title replace generating operator pointer in lazy open lists with operator ID
Priority feature Status resolved
Superseder Nosy List cedric, jendrik, malte
Assigned To cedric Keywords
Optional summary

Created on 2016-12-15.12:34:19 by jendrik, last changed by cedric.

msg5982 (view) Author: malte Date: 2016-12-22.22:10:28
Excellent! :-) I think we can merge this. BTW, for future changes to the open
lists and/or lazy search, we should include the "lama-first" configuration in
the experiments. "seq-sat-lama-2011" (the anytime version) and "lama-first" (the
first algorithm run by seq-sat-lama-2011) are our best configurations for
satisficing planning, and they use lazy search. But I don't think it's necessary
to run new experiments just for this. (Although I would be curious if we also
get 64-bit improvements for lama-first with this new code.)
msg5969 (view) Author: cedric Date: 2016-12-22.08:46:26
Here are the results of the experiments with 64-bit. The experiments show that
the memory consumption decreases with the operator IDs.
msg5935 (view) Author: cedric Date: 2016-12-20.14:57:28
Here is the pull request

And I will run the experiments for 64-bits.
msg5927 (view) Author: malte Date: 2016-12-20.14:18:16
I would suggest already running 64-bit experiments now, as I think the hash
table changes are more or less independent, and I'd be happier to merge this
with the 64-bit version already tested.
msg5926 (view) Author: jendrik Date: 2016-12-20.14:13:36
Cedric, can you please link the pull request here? I already had a look locally and 
the code looks good to me.
msg5924 (view) Author: cedric Date: 2016-12-20.13:34:36
Here are the results of the experiment:

This experiment is only for the 32-bit configuration. The experiments do not
show a decrease in performance, so it should be save to merge. I think further
experiments should be run with the 64-bit configuration when the new
hash-function is implemented (issue213).
msg5906 (view) Author: malte Date: 2016-12-19.14:53:32
This may be a lot of work because the open lists are implemented as templates.
It might mean that we require template specializations for all open lists. I
think we should look at the code first and then decide how to implement this.
msg5902 (view) Author: jendrik Date: 2016-12-19.12:39:16
Cedric agreed to take over this issue. We'll try to keep the interface as it is for 
now and change it to accepting IDs in a separate issue.
msg5892 (view) Author: jendrik Date: 2016-12-15.12:34:19
Split off from issue213.

"[We want to] replace the generating operator pointer in
lazy open lists with an operator ID, similar to the change for SearchNodeInfo.
We might then also want to change the interface so that it works with these IDs
and we don't have to convert back and forth between operator pointers and IDs
when we actually use IDs on both ends."

We decided against doing this change as part of issue688, but I think it would be 
easiest if we could merge issue688 before starting to work on this issue.
Date User Action Args
2016-12-23 12:04:55cedricsetstatus: chatting -> resolved
2016-12-22 22:10:28maltesetmessages: + msg5982
2016-12-22 08:46:27cedricsetmessages: + msg5969
2016-12-20 14:57:28cedricsetmessages: + msg5935
2016-12-20 14:18:16maltesetmessages: + msg5927
2016-12-20 14:13:36jendriksetmessages: + msg5926
2016-12-20 13:34:36cedricsetmessages: + msg5924
2016-12-19 14:53:32maltesetmessages: + msg5906
2016-12-19 12:39:16jendriksetstatus: unread -> chatting
assignedto: jendrik -> cedric
messages: + msg5902
nosy: + cedric
2016-12-15 12:34:19jendrikcreate