|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Thanks for the reply
That is what I have heard from elsewhere
I run my 2000i on Windows 2000 on a Pentium 800 machine and cannot adjust a
trendline without 2000i bombing out while running live when high volume
throughput comes into play at market open.
I have been looking for anything to solve the problem.
If what you say is correct then what is all this discussion of Windows 2000
and expensive computers to achieve the same thing. Are these people on the
list crazy or do they have oodles of cash to throw away on expensive
equipment. Why is not NT 4.00 offered or discussed as a simple and
inexpensive solution to the problem.
Zoran
-----Original Message-----
From: the_omega_man@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:the_omega_man@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2001 12:38 AM
To: Zoran Gayer
Subject: RE: Radar Screen Performance
I've been running it just fine in real-time on an NT 4.0 (SP 6) machine
for a couple of years now... The machine is a Dell Pentium II 400 MHz with
384 Meg of RAM and a quad monitor setup. I do not use RadarScreen.
At Sat, 19 May 2001 09:40:31 +1000, "Zoran Gayer"
<elliottwave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
>I am told that Trade Station 2000i runs OK on NT4.0 service pack 4.0
>or
>higher with few problems and that very fast computers are not required.
> Are
>there any users of NT4.0 service pack 4 or higher using Trade Station
>2000i
>with success without going to the latest upgrades in computers ram etc.
> I
>am told that it is a better and a cheaper option. Any comments.
>
>
>Zoran
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: dvd@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:dvd@xxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 8:21 AM
>To: John Hoefer; omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Radar Screen Performance
>
>
>John,
>
>I had this general problem, though of shorter duration, even with Win2k.
>Bid and Ask, in particular, lagged for long periods. TS tech told me
>the
>problem was due to the fact that these fields were the last fetched
>during a cycle, and that since the data was coming in so fast, the cycle
>had to restart without completely fetching all the data. Or something
>to
>that effect. (It was difficult to get a straight statement from the
>person I spoke with.)
>
>I also had a long session with DTN tech support about this. He was kind
>enough to duplicate the problem on his TS2k machine using their Bridge
>feed, and then test it with a different feed and with Chameleon. He
>had
>the same problem on both feeds using TS2k but not with Chameleon on
>either feed. He then showed me how to use Win2k to monitor the RAM usage
>(not through the Task Manager, but some more direct way that I don't
>recall right now). He said that when the RAM usage spiked to the 80%
>to
>100% range that I might be losing some of the data in RAM. He suggested
>buying more RAM.
>
>I increased the RAM from 256mb to 768 mb, (on a PIII, 600) the maximum
>my motherboard can hold. This has helped to greatly lessen the problem
>but not eliminate it completely, though its hard to tell by exactly
>how
>much without a direct comparison to someone else's machine.
>
>My own experience agrees with the advice in a previous post: I believe
>it helps to throw as much hardware as possible at TS2k (though this
>probably also depends on the number of workspaces you have open, whether
>you work with high volume stocks, and the number and complexity of the
>indicators you run. I have reduced the number of open workspaces, which
>may have also helped to reduce the problem.). By hardware, I also mean
>the speed and optimization of the harddrive(s), as well as the CPU and
>RAM. I have heard that a RAID setup is much faster and I would be
>interested in hearing the experiences of anyone who has tried it.
>
>(I am also assuming that by now others have mentioned that upgrading
>to
>Win2k will probably also help with this problem.)
>
>Good luck,
>
>David
>
>
>
>John Hoefer wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>> Of late there has been a problem with my radar screen
>> where the workspace will fall behind the market first
>> thing in the morning and take approx. 21/2 hours to
>> catch up. During this time when checking the charts
>> they are current. I can close out the file and restart
>> and be current. This problem has only recently started
>> after 2 years, I have been told by tech support to
>> upgrade to windows 2000 from windows 98.
>>
>> Has any body else had similar problems and have any
>> advice for me.
>>
>> thank you,
>> John Hoefer
>
Free, encrypted, secure Web-based email at www.hushmail.com
|