|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
No, "nosync" would NOT give ANY advantage for all non-tick intervals, only bring problems for users unaware of all issues.
And no it won't be quicker because current timesync algorithm is extremely efficient and runs at memcpy() speed.
The only use of "nosync" option would be storing data that is unrelated to time.
This option will be hidden, because people without significant programming knowledge and exprience would just
shoot themselves in a foot trying to use nosync option.
Best regards,
Tomasz Janeczko
amibroker.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "brian_z111" <brian_z111@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 12:41 AM
Subject: [amibroker] Re: AmiBroker 5.24.0 BETA released .Static array variables implemented!
Yes please,
I think a 'no sync' flag would be a lot of 'bang for the buck'.
Haven't downloaded and tried the beta yet but if they are not persistent, between sessions and databases, that would be good ... I
would like to save a 'no sync' calculated array and reference it again at a later date..... like an ~ATC in the sym list but not
necessarily visible.
I think it is a way to bypass writing to files ... much quicker too.
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Dennis Brown <see3d@xxx> wrote:
>
> Tomasz,
>
> I would welcome your idea of a "nosync" flag.
>
> Some of the uses I have for static arrays involve data that has no
> relation to time stamps. Other uses are for saving temporary results
> of calculations that are only needed once per parameter change on very
> large arrays (200K) for special case backtesting. The backtests are
> on one security in indicator mode with real time feed off. Speed is
> important as it can take 20-30 seconds for one AFL pass today without
> static arrays. It will take a while before processor speeds increase
> 30x.
>
> In these cases the extra overhead of matching time stamps would not be
> needed, and in the first case might actually create problems.
>
> Best regards,
> Dennis
>
> On Mar 7, 2009, at 4:08 AM, Tomasz Janeczko wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > In that case it will work because timestamps are in sync.
> >
> > In the future I may consider adding "nosync" flag, that will skip
> > any timestamp matching logic for such simple scenarios.
> >
> > Generally speaking static array variables are designed to "do their
> > best" to synchronize to selected symbol even if there is no match.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Tomasz Janeczko
> > amibroker.com
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: J. Biran
> > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 8:08 AM
> > Subject: RE: [amibroker] AmiBroker 5.24.0 BETA released .Static
> > array variables implemented!
> >
> > Hi TJ,
> > Would you care to clarify comment d) below in the case of trying to
> > import output of one indicator from one pane to a second pane of
> > same symbol and same interval when the interval is Range bars.
> > Will it not work in that case?
> >
> > --
> >
> > Joseph Biran
> > ____________________________________________
> >
> > From: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > On Behalf Of Tomasz Janeczko
> > Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 6:59 AM
> > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [amibroker] AmiBroker 5.24.0 BETA released .Static array
> > variables implemented! (do NOT work well for tick/volume intervals!)
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > AmiBroker 5.24.0 BETA is released now:
> > http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/2009/03/06/amibroker-5240-beta-released/
> >
> > This is somewhat special beta because it contains only one fix and
> > introduces only one new feature: array static variables.
> > I decided to release this feature "alone" because the static
> > variable code has been completely rewritten, so in case of any
> > issues, it would be easy to revert to 5.23.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Tomasz Janeczko
> > amibroker.com
> > d) static array variables do not work well for non-time based
> > intervals (tick/n-volume/n-tick) because timestamps in those intervals
> > may not be unique (i.e. several bars may have same time stamp), so
> > time synchronization is not reliable.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------
**** IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
This group is for the discussion between users only.
This is *NOT* technical support channel.
TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to
SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER at
http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/
(submissions sent via other channels won't be considered)
For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------------------
**** IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
This group is for the discussion between users only.
This is *NOT* technical support channel.
TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to
SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER at
http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/
(submissions sent via other channels won't be considered)
For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:amibroker-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:amibroker-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|