Support Board
Date/Time: Thu, 26 Dec 2024 11:04:36 +0000
[User Discussion] - sierrachart performance in VM vs wine
View Count: 2200
| [2016-03-11 23:34:30] |
| dominikos - Posts: 106 |
|
I was wondering if anybody has looked in performance difference of Sierra Chart running in VM vs Wine on the same computer. I run it on iMac with Parallels VM running Windows 10. It works quite well and performance well as well but it takes some time to reload charts when changing chart type on the existing data. I blamed disk virtualization on this and tried to run on Wine but I don't see significant improvement. Does anybody have strong opinion one way or the other? Functionality wise, I think it could work both ways. It is easier to run it on Wine with multiple monitors. Thoughts, strong opinions? Thanks, - Dominik |
| [2016-03-12 00:28:22] |
| |
|
Does the computer have a SSD and 16 GB of memory? That will help. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2016-03-12 00:28:37
|
| [2016-03-12 00:41:58] |
| dominikos - Posts: 106 |
|
So, I have iMac with 24GB of RAM and Fusion drive - so partially SSD. On windows I noticed that loading charts can max out the CPU and that was primary reason to try on Wine again. I also use IB so Java client takes some CPU cycles. If I understand properly, Wine is 32bit only, so it cannot take advantage of more than 4GBs. Since I use volume profiles, I load my charts with tick resolution. Also, I haven't tried to run two instances, one for charting and one for data feed. |
| [2016-03-12 00:53:02] |
| i960 - Posts: 360 |
|
I have a similar setup as you, dominikos: VMWare Fusion on a MBP w/ 750GB SSD and 16GB of RAM also with IB and eSignal running in the background (which don't take a whole heck of a lot of CPU). Chart loading is always going to be gated by CPU for the most part and particularly if you have a lot of data or longer charts (intraday especially) there's no getting around this. Wine is not going to improve anything as you're not gated by syscalls or other windows functions as the main limiter. At the point SC is computing charts it's 100% usercode within SC which should be within 95% of a native Windows environment regardless of VMWare, Parallels, or Wine.
|
| [2016-03-12 01:08:19] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
dominikos wine was/is/will be always buggy and it is just not serious to use wine for business it's just for gamers and housekeepers Sierra Chart running in VM vs Wine
wine 1.8 (crossover 15) is charting very smooth on CentOS 6 and Debian 8and it's realy cool to use a native Linux g++ compiler mingw32 to build ACSIL studies all of other aspects are annoying |
| [2016-03-12 01:15:25] |
| dominikos - Posts: 106 |
|
i960/ganz, thank you for sharing your thoughts. I've been using Parallels and quite happy. Looks like I'm going to keep it this way and perhaps consider setting up a dedicated trading workstation or adding external monitors to my imac. Thanks |
| [2016-03-12 12:28:59] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
dominikos try w7 x32 starter or winXPsp3 using VM to boost it |
To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: