|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
i found that rambooster causes tick loss in high tick volume issues, such
as es0z, when used with ts4 and win9X. the data feed was bmi sat. before
rambooster was loaded, ts4 server tick counts were identical on all win9X
machines. when rambooster was loaded on one win9x machine, but not on the
other machines, es0z on the rambooster machine lost on average of 140 ticks
per session when compared with the non-rambooster machines. the tick loss
was the same whether rambooster was active on either the win95 and win98
machine, it made no difference. but when rambooster was disabled again,
the tick counts were identical on all machines again. all machines were
dedicated to running only ts4. the amount of memory was found to be unimportant.
the mhz clock speed of the processor was found to be unimportant too. all
had uart 16550 ports. adjusting the amount of memory to be freed under rambooster
made no difference either. and it's NOT a bmi related problem....i believe
that the rambooster related tick loss extends to other feeds as well.
the message is clear...rambooster causes tick loss when running it on win9X
machines and ts4. i suspect that if one runs other memory hog processes
such as web surfing while collecting ts4 data, the tick loss in high tick
volume issues may be much higher than what i found on my dedicated machines.
sure, it's not a lot, but if you're running tick dependent indicators or
systems, the errors compound quickly as the tick loss mounts. so one has
to walk the tightrope between system stability and data integrity when dealing
with memory utilities. it ain't as simple as it appears, at least in my
study. be careful.
TJ
fwiw, i haven't suffer a system lockup running ts4 under win3.XX or win9X
in years...i'll take all the luck and good fortune i can get :))))
|