|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Great study.
While the computers in the study were identical, the results don't
necessarily predict the results of our studio audience. The number of lost
ticks will vary with a number of factors including
Number of symbols in portfolio
Number of symbols having real time data stored
Speed of the processor (A P5-200 will loose more ticks than a PII-233)
Amount of RAM
Speed of hardisk access and amount of space
Operating system (say NT vs. 95/98)
Serial port type
In other words, though the study machines showed a data loss of 23%, a
faster machine with more RAM may only loose 1% because its able to
distribute news data faster. A similar machine with a slower processor and
less RAM could loose even more than 23%.
The BMI news program may not suffer the same penalties.
-----Original Message-----
From: James F. Mazzulla [SMTP:tagteam@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 1998 8:38 PM
To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Data Accuracy
On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 Richard C. wrote:
>The computer which did not collect news data collected 23.8% more data
>(ticks) than the computer collecting news. This percentage was calculated
on
>file size not the number of ticks.
I run News continually. Based upon a comparison with other
TS users and the CME website, I do miss some ticks. The
loss, however, only appears to be around 1% (on average)
and I haven't been able to determine whether it's related to
running News or something else. Regardless, 23% is =huge=
and I simply can't imagine a loss of that magnitude being
related =exclusively= to collecting news.
Best regards,
Jim
|