Support Board
Date/Time: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 03:49:50 +0000
Sierra Chart Performance
View Count: 799
| [2023-05-28 15:06:25] |
| Ed Goppelt - Posts: 41 |
|
1. Has anyone compiled a benchmarking suite of chartbook groups and stats available for download for various hardware configurations? I'd like to know how my rig stacks up against other peoples'. 2. I want to investigate the possibility that "inefficient study configurations" are slowing my system down. Has anyone (e.g., SC support) compiled some examples of poorly designed studies with lousy performance for download so that others may benefit from their hard won experience? 3. I was shocked to discover that SC's own documentation on performance tuning doesn't include a maxed out GPU as a cause for lousy SC performance. In my case running my recording software (OBX) and SC at the same time resulted in 100% GPU usage and agonizingly slow performance when switching chartbook groups. Reducing the recording rez and refresh time helped considerably, but ultimately I discarded the video recording altogether. SC's performance tuning documentation: High CPU Usage | Inactive User Interface | Poor Performance | Long Time to Load Chart Data | Charts Reloading Often: 30.48 - Basic Steps to Resolve Performance Issue in Sierra Chart) |
| [2023-05-28 17:07:39] |
| Sierra_Chart Engineering - Posts: 17199 |
|
3. This would never be documented because we would only document issues/configurations within Sierra Chart itself that can cause performance issues.
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, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2023-05-28 17:07:53
|
| [2023-05-29 08:32:30] |
| Ed Goppelt - Posts: 41 |
|
No comment from SC on (1), I see. Does SC not engage in performance benchmarking of its own products? Hard to believe you don't [secretly] benchmark your own product. I can imagine possible reasons you might withhold benchmarking tools and data from your users. It would put enormous pressure on your programmers to fix the weaker parts of your product, might be used in the adverts of competitors etc. But if you really stand by the overall excellence of your product, I respectfully suggest the benefits of supplying your users with accurate/actionable performance data on SC will surely outweigh its costs. 3. This would never be documented because we would only document issues/configurations within Sierra Chart itself that can cause performance issues.
SC don't exist in a vacuum. The very fact that you only offer SC on Windows despite the existence of vastly superior hardware/software platforms (Apple, Linux) suggests SC Engineering has put other, outside considerations (e.g., profit) ahead of the performance and reliability of its product by its choice to only support Windows. It's been decades since I was a programmer, but aren't there cross platform development tools for C++? What is preventing you from offering users the ability to run SC on Linux and Apple? From google: Can C++ be used for cross-platform?
C++ is also one of the initial cross-platform languages, even though it couldn't shift into the world of the web and mobile. C++ is best suited for developing software like operating systems, database engines, game engines, compilers, and servers. At the same time, C++ is a great choice as a cross-platform language. |
| [2023-05-29 10:30:18] |
| Sierra_Chart Engineering - Posts: 17199 |
|
What exactly does this mean to you?: performance benchmarking of its own products?
Sierra Chart is designed to be very fast and efficient. There is consideration to performance always with the code that is developed. Sometimes performance testing, not benchmarking, is performed to analyze code and determine where improvements need to be made. And those improvements are made. Not sure what is meant by benchmarking. It has absolutely no place, in the realm of Sierra Chart at all. What does this mean?: It would put enormous pressure on your programmers to fix the weaker parts of your product,
Performance is very important, and where improvements can be made they are made immediately once it becomes clear, that improvement can be made. You are way off course, on your conclusions and beliefs, in post #3. We are not going to comment on this further. 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, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2023-05-29 10:32:22
|
| [2023-05-29 13:57:45] |
| Tony - Posts: 521 |
|
I have a hard time to believe someone who has been a professional programmer for decades doesn't know Sierra runs on Linux and Mac M1/M2 smoothly and flawlessly, and not able to use something called Google to search related subjects.
Date Time Of Last Edit: 2023-05-29 13:59:40
|
| [2023-05-29 14:37:58] |
| Sierra_Chart Engineering - Posts: 17199 |
|
Yes exactly. The very fact that you only offer SC on Windows despite the existence of vastly superior hardware/software platforms (Apple, Linux) suggests SC Engineering has put other, outside considerations (e.g., profit) ahead of the performance and reliability of its product by its choice to only support Windows. This has nothing to do with profit. Unfortunately most of our time is wasted on CME market data policy and absurdities like that. We are working to allow Sierra Chart to be ported to another operating system and we are getting close to doing that. There is a lot of work to do and just takes years to accomplish. It's been decades since I was a programmer, but aren't there cross platform development tools for C++? What is preventing you from offering users the ability to run SC on Linux and Apple? No there is nothing that is even remotely close to acceptable for Sierra Chart. What is out there, is unacceptable performance and would be fully detrimental to Sierra Chart and would destroy the product.
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, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2023-05-30 07:31:40] |
| Ed Goppelt - Posts: 41 |
|
I have a hard time to believe someone who has been a professional programmer for decades doesn't know Sierra runs on Linux and Mac M1/M2 smoothly and flawlessly, and not able to use something called Google to search related subjects.
Don't waste my time with this uninformed snark. Sure you can run Sierra Chart using Wine on Linux with a substantial performance hit. "Now that Wine has matured to the point of running many applications correctly, people are expecting them to run as fast as on Windows. Sadly, this is not always the case. Here are a few notes related to tracking down performance issues."--https://wiki.winehq.org/Performance |
| [2023-05-30 08:05:38] |
| Ed Goppelt - Posts: 41 |
|
Now, I feel bad. For the record, I *like* your product despite the steep learning curve, frequently hostile support, and often unusable default settings for some of your key studies. I just signed up for another 6 month hitch. This has nothing to do with profit. Unfortunately most of our time is wasted on CME market data policy and absurdities like that.
Yeah, that sounds super frustrating. But oddly, I wonder if SC's situation doesn't ultimately have to do with profit, namely with not making enough of it so that you programmers can program and do R&D and aren't stuck with writing up new symbol files every time CME sneezes or providing the majority of user support. My two cents: I think SC should 1) raise its prices and 2) stop trying to be everything to everyone (i.e., reduce costs for marginal business lines). Re: 1, I would certainly pay more for a premier class of support. I would pay more for a native linux version of your software. Re: 2, even though it goes against my own interests as an IBKR customer, I think you should drop TWS as a supported platform or charge a premium for it. We are working to allow Sierra Chart to be ported to another operating system and we are getting close to doing that. There is a lot of work to do and just takes years to accomplish.
Ugh. Nobody goes through a major platform switch without experiencing serious pain. I don't envy you. Good luck. |
| [2023-05-30 12:38:51] |
| Sierra_Chart Engineering - Posts: 17199 |
|
To let you know, post #5 is not from Sierra Chart support.
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, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: