|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Make sure that you don't have update on every tick set on any of your
indicators.
Jim Bronke
Phoenix, AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Zoran Gayer" <elliottwave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Omega-List@xxxxxxx Com" <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>;
<the_omega_man@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 3:41 PM
Subject: RE: Radar Screen Performance
>
> 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
>
|