|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
On Tue, 7 Sep 1999, Ullrich Fischer wrote:
> While I've been as frustrated as most of the people here with the time and
> effort it took to sidegrade to TS2Ki, in fairness to the folks at Omega, I
> have to say that running under NT 4 SP5 on a 400 MHz AMD K6 processor with
> 256 MB of RAM, TS2Ki is more solid than TS4 was under WIN98 on a P100 with
> 64 Mb of RAM.
That is not my experience so far with 591 on NT, but read on...
> I can have 30+ workspaces open now with 3 charts and a total
> of a dozen or so indicators in each workspace without crashing every two
> hours like I was with TS4.
My TS4 on an old K6 runs about 20+ workspaces, each with the maximum
number of charts and indicators allowed, with most charts having the
maximum number of bars allowed, and most indicators are computationally
intensive. Despite this, I can run all week without crashing, week after
week.
My new TS2k on an NT P400 has a problem several times a day, and
components need restarting quite often. Since I'm getting up to speed, I
use 'help' a lot, and it crashes quite often (for example). I'm also doing
much updating of indicators to run on 2k.
I have a theory for why this is true. The TS4 machine has had all its
development done, and is a dedicated machine that runs nothing else but
TS. All it has to do is keep collecting data and produce charts, and it
can do this reliably. If I do have to go in and muck about with any kind
of 'development', it does tend to be *much* less stable.
The TS2k machine is just now being brought online. This means there is
*much* 'develpoment', with all sorts of things being run within TS
(editor, server changes, help, etc...). As a result, this machine has a
great deal of problems.
The theory is that either TS is OK if it just "runs", with *nothing* else
being done on the machine except collect data and produce charts. What do
you think? Is this the difference between the folks that do and don't
have problems?
If so, the reality is that to get good reliability TS2k needs a dedicated
NT machine that does nothing else during the trading day.
Also, if this theory is correct, the added bells and whistles (Inet
access, etc) built into TS2k will cause it to be less stable, unless, of
course, you don't use them. But then you end up with something similar to
TS4. (Maybe a 32 bit recompile of TS4, with minor changes, is not such a
bad idea...)
For me, the NT vs 98 issue is quite clear - TS2k *needs* NT, for several
reasons mentioned before on the list.
Larry
|