i have 4 computers running ab, one of which is a
laptop. file based
synchronistion is more than adequate. i make sure all the necessary
files are synced before undocking. when i get back with the changes,
i just resync again. it is no different than usind word.
unidirectional means you cant update 2 copies of the same file
separately. but it does stop you from taking your laptop to your
local coffee shop to work on AB
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com,
"progster01" <progster@xx.> wrote:
>
> Response to Paul Ho:
>
> Though I agree with your comment about the difficulty and relative
> pointlessness of "Real time multiple computer data
synchronization"
> for AB (ala banking software), that is not what I was talking
about at
> all.
>
> OTOH, to require that the "propagation of updates is kept
> unidirectional" is EXACTLY the problem.
>
> I am very affected by it. I'm sure others are too. I feel
confident
> in speculating that this limitation is an artifact of the history
of
> AB's development. IOW, this issue simply wasn't in the forefront
of
> thinking at the point where decisions were made that created the
> unidirectionality. (As an aside, computers used to be much more
> expensive, and people didn't often used to have 2 or more of them.)
>
> These days, most tools do not have this limitation. The ones that
> don't have it are MUCH easier to work with and be productive with,
> insofar as operating with multiple computers is concerned.
>
> Do you ever take a laptop with you somewhere and write code or
create
> a workspace while you are away? Do you ever have a hardware or
> software failure that puts the "primary" machine out of
commission
for
> a period of time? Do you ever run large-scale optimizations that
make
> the "primary" machine inconvenient or impossible to use for some
> period of time? Do you ever have AB online on a "primary"
machine
and
> want to do some coding or new workspace layout on a different
machine?
>
> If so, you now have a time-wasting, productivity destroying
> synchronization problem to solve - a problem that wouldn't be
there if
> the software architecture did not play poorly with commonly used
> multi-machine file sync techniques.
>
> The problem is the whole notion of a "primary" machine. IMO,
there is
> no good reason why one AB installation should be favored over
others.
> The user should be able to work on any number of installations and
> resync them easily, with standard tools.
>
> This is a problem that does not have to exist. It could be
eliminated
> at the source (with some effort and architectural adjustment to be
> sure), and I think that change would be HIGHLY BENEFICIAL for the
> platform and for the users of it.
>
> (I will respond to TJ in a separate message).
>
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com,
"Paul Ho" <paultsho@> wrote:
> >
> > Totally disagree with that.
> > I believe AB has given us small time traders an edge and I
> personally dont
> > want real time multiple computer data synchronation.
> > because firstly it is both expensive and time consuming to
> implement, and
> > usually comes with performance penalty. Just look at how long and
> > troublesome banking software take to implement. Secondly, I am
happy
> that AB
> > is staying out of large Coporates radar screen. Like TJ said, the
> current
> > architecture is completely workable if I understand how to copy
> files over
> > and that propagation of updates is kept unidirectional. It is
more than
> > capable to running multiple instances and on multiple machines.
I do
> however
> > support running large scale optimization over multiple machines.
> > The problems mentioned above exist because people dont follow
> instructions
> > or know what the instructions are. Creating complex
synchronisation
> regime
> > will create another set of and larger problems for those who
still dont
> > follow instructions.
> >
> >
> > _____
> >
> > From: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com
[mailto:amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com]
> On Behalf
> > Of progster01
> > Sent: Saturday, 12 January 2008 12:35 PM
> > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com
> > Subject: SV: [amibroker] auto file synchronizers (was Re:
Extremely
> tired of
> > this.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > If AB is running on one computer using such sharing it is fine.
> > > But if you run multiple instances simultaneously
> > > on multiple machines and you are using this sharing the
> > > results will be unpredictable.
> >
> > Not to be too cute, but who uses just one computer anymore ...
> >
> > TJ, I appreciate your direct acknowlegement of this situation.
It's
> > something that people should know about in advance (if possible)
of
> > assuming/attempting otherwise.
> >
> > I sincerely hope that an appropriately high priority will be
given to
> > enhancing the AB architecture so that creational work done on
different
> > machines at different times (charts made, code written, layouts
created,
> > etc. etc.) can be easily cr0ss-copied to be available
identically on
> > each machine, with no problems being created thereby.
> >
>