GSB Forums

General support questions.

 Pages:  1  2    4    6  ..  25

admin - 1-7-2018 at 09:15 PM

Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
Hi Peter,

I've ran into a little problem, not sure how I did it or how to fix it.

I was trying to change the Price data file and some how stuffed something up, now when I click on it I get an error message.

Thanks.

im not sure. Worst case close gsb and start again. If your still stuck we can do teamviwer

boothy - 1-7-2018 at 10:35 PM

yes I've shut down GSB and restarted a couple times, still doing same thing

admin - 1-7-2018 at 10:38 PM

Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
yes I've shut down GSB and restarted a couple times, still doing same thing

i guess the app or opt settings are screwed. Mostly likely app settings.
Just reinstall the install exe again and it should fix it

boothy - 2-7-2018 at 04:33 PM

Hi Peter

I’m trying to use manager and workers and while it is running lots of Exception: messages are coming up in notifications centre in windows. I’ve also noticed that the workers have created about 2000 unique systems each (5 workers) but they are not transfering into manager properly, manager is only showing 164 systems. Speed seams slow too, about 3000/min with 5 workers. But I get up to 5000/min with stand alone.
Is there some settings I don’t have set correctly ?

Cheers.

CA46F450-45DC-40F1-A0D6-283AF64086C0.jpeg - 1.2MB

admin - 2-7-2018 at 04:42 PM

Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
Hi Peter

I’m trying to use manager and workers and while it is running lots of Exception: messages are coming up in notifications centre in windows. I’ve also noticed that the workers have created about 2000 unique systems each (5 workers) but they are not transfering into manager properly, manager is only showing 164 systems. Speed seams slow too, about 3000/min with 5 workers. But I get up to 5000/min with stand alone.
Is there some settings I don’t have set correctly ?

Cheers.

I think your internet connection to GSB sequal server is weak.go to command prompt
ping xeon3.zwag.biz -t
It that doesnt pick it, send me the exception files zipped up.
Are you on a laptop with wifi?



ping.png - 22kB

boothy - 2-7-2018 at 04:48 PM

I'm on my new desktop connected with ethernet cable to my modem.


ping test seems ok



Capture2.PNG - 59kB

admin - 2-7-2018 at 04:54 PM

Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
I'm on my new desktop connected with ethernet cable to my modem.


ping test seems ok


are you getting issues now?
Im running 82 workers right now with no execeptions.
Keep ping running. If you get exceptions, control c I think ends ping and gives the total error count.
zip up exception folder under gsb...exe manager and or workers.
check also the time stamps on your exceptions to see when they occured

boothy - 2-7-2018 at 05:17 PM

When I did ping test before I had shut down GSB, now with GSB running ping test times out frequently and exceptions are coming up frequently also.
Ive attached ping test stats and zipped exceptions file


Capture3.PNG - 31kB

Attachment: Login to view the details


admin - 2-7-2018 at 05:28 PM

well thats your issue. use tracert xeon3.zwag.biz to see if you can find the issue.
and or ping your isp gateway (your router will tell you this)
and or use pingplotter app. (simplist option if your not techy)
Bottom line is this is a internet issue.

boothy - 2-7-2018 at 05:33 PM

ok, I was only using local workers, I didn't open cloud worker. I thought it would run locally on my system, does it still connect through internet for something?

admin - 2-7-2018 at 06:15 PM

Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
ok, I was only using local workers, I didn't open cloud worker. I thought it would run locally on my system, does it still connect through internet for something?

Correct. Standalones will not have this issue

boothy - 2-7-2018 at 07:29 PM

So I've run ping plotter and contacted my isp and the problem seems to be from maxing out my upload speed. I'm on adsl2+ with TPG and the max upload I can have is 1mbps.

just so I understand, when running workers, do they send the information back to the Manager via xeon3.zwag server? I assumed not running cloud workers would just be localised on my computer.

is there anyway around this? as NBN is not available at my address.

cheers.

admin - 2-7-2018 at 07:49 PM

Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
So I've run ping plotter and contacted my isp and the problem seems to be from maxing out my upload speed. I'm on adsl2+ with TPG and the max upload I can have is 1mbps.

just so I understand, when running workers, do they send the information back to the Manager via xeon3.zwag server? I assumed not running cloud workers would just be localised on my computer.

is there anyway around this? as NBN is not available at my address.

cheers.

how many worker are you running?
adding more filters to give less systems might help.
I will do a bandwidth check on my workers, but will be 24 hours
Peter

boothy - 3-7-2018 at 02:39 AM

Hi Peter,

so earlier I was running 5 workers and gsb started up with default app settings on AllOosPass, so yes very loose settings.

I have since been doing some testing.

2 workers with app settings of ESsystemsTight,
5700 sys/m, 200-300kbs upload on Ethernet and no exceptions.

4 workers with app settings of ESsystemsTight,
7500 sys/m, 700-900kbs upload on Ethernet and no exceptions for 1hr 45min of running, then I stopped, all but 2 systems loaded into manager, did some walkforwards and then got a couple exceptions.

5 workers with app settings of ESsystemTight,
no good, well over 1mbps on Ethernet, lots of exception, just as bad as earlier.



admin - 3-7-2018 at 02:52 AM

Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
Hi Peter,

so earlier I was running 5 workers and gsb started up with default app settings on AllOosPass, so yes very loose settings.

I have since been doing some testing.

2 workers with app settings of ESsystemsTight,
5700 sys/m, 200-300kbs upload on Ethernet and no exceptions.

4 workers with app settings of ESsystemsTight,
7500 sys/m, 700-900kbs upload on Ethernet and no exceptions for 1hr 45min of running, then I stopped, all but 2 systems loaded into manager, did some walkforwards and then got a couple exceptions.

5 workers with app settings of ESsystemTight,
no good, well over 1mbps on Ethernet, lots of exception, just as bad as earlier.



Sql server down for a little while today and is not up yet. That may affect results. Bottom line is we will reduce cloud traffic before long

emsjoflo - 3-7-2018 at 03:00 AM

I can't seem to get Custom indicators working with the latest version 1.0.47.10. I Clicked "Tools >Custom Indicators>Generate Export Script..." like I have in the past. Created the .txt file and clicked "Tools >Custom Indicators>Load Exported Files" it popped up a dialog that said "0 Custom Indicator(s) loaded..."
I tried copying a .bin file that worked in a previous version of GSB and it did not work either.

admin - 3-7-2018 at 03:47 AM

Quote: Originally posted by emsjoflo  
I can't seem to get Custom indicators working with the latest version 1.0.47.10. I Clicked "Tools >Custom Indicators>Generate Export Script..." like I have in the past. Created the .txt file and clicked "Tools >Custom Indicators>Load Exported Files" it popped up a dialog that said "0 Custom Indicator(s) loaded..."
I tried copying a .bin file that worked in a previous version of GSB and it did not work either.

CI is not working with multi data yet. Did you try with single or multi?

admin - 3-7-2018 at 03:55 AM

Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by emsjoflo  
I can't seem to get Custom indicators working with the latest version 1.0.47.10. I Clicked "Tools >Custom Indicators>Generate Export Script..." like I have in the past. Created the .txt file and clicked "Tools >Custom Indicators>Load Exported Files" it popped up a dialog that said "0 Custom Indicator(s) loaded..."
I tried copying a .bin file that worked in a previous version of GSB and it did not work either.

CI is not working with multi data yet. Did you try with single or multi?


If it is NOT multi data then do a support ticket, under help

admin - 3-7-2018 at 04:15 AM

Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
Hi Peter,

so earlier I was running 5 workers and gsb started up with default app settings on AllOosPass, so yes very loose settings.

I have since been doing some testing.

2 workers with app settings of ESsystemsTight,
5700 sys/m, 200-300kbs upload on Ethernet and no exceptions.

4 workers with app settings of ESsystemsTight,
7500 sys/m, 700-900kbs upload on Ethernet and no exceptions for 1hr 45min of running, then I stopped, all but 2 systems loaded into manager, did some walkforwards and then got a couple exceptions.

5 workers with app settings of ESsystemTight,
no good, well over 1mbps on Ethernet, lots of exception, just as bad as earlier.



Sql server down for a little while today and is not up yet. That may affect results. Bottom line is we will reduce cloud traffic before long

Cloud is up again, and we are looking into high bandwidth issue.

boosted - 3-7-2018 at 06:07 PM

Recently updated to 47.10.

Decided to run a quick Standalone run for some strategies and ran into an issue with results not coming anywhere close to what GSB strategies are reporting.

I'm testing on ESU18 data from 12/1/2017 to 1/31/2018 with 3m resolution. I have 3m chart set to Exchange and made custom session for 800 to 1500. During GSB strategy building I set trading period dates 2017-01-02 to 2017-01-31 with Times set to 800 to 1500 and closing out EOD. I used ES 3m for both Data1 and Data2.

I placed random profitable GSB strategy in chart to make sure strategies are matching up as they should between GSB and TS results. They were almost polar opposite results.

I checked random dates and times for the ES 3m data I am using and it matched up with chart. I checked the GSB code and everything looked fine there too. I even changed the endDate in GSB code to make test against TS results as is recommended. I tried testing with Back-testing resolution on and off with 1m resolution and nothing changed. I looked at GSB reported trade times, prices etc. and most were very different than TS.

I have run out of ideas why these GSB results are so far off with TS results. All GSB strategies I put into TS reported as big losers compared to GSB results, which were polar opposite profitable.

I will attach the ES 3m txt file I am using.

Anybody with reason(s) and/or solutions for the issue I am having with GSB vs TS results is much appreciated.

Thank you.

Attachment: Login to view the details


admin - 3-7-2018 at 06:11 PM

Quote: Originally posted by boosted  
Recently updated to 47.10.

Decided to run a quick Standalone run for some strategies and ran into an issue with results not coming anywhere close to what GSB strategies are reporting.

I'm testing on ESU18 data from 12/1/2017 to 1/31/2018 with 3m resolution. I have 3m chart set to Exchange and made custom session for 800 to 1500. During GSB strategy building I set trading period dates 2017-01-02 to 2017-01-31 with Times set to 800 to 1500 and closing out EOD. I used ES 3m for both Data1 and Data2.

I placed random profitable GSB strategy in chart to make sure strategies are matching up as they should between GSB and TS results. They were almost polar opposite results.

I checked random dates and times for the ES 3m data I am using and it matched up with chart. I checked the GSB code and everything looked fine there too. I even changed the endDate in GSB code to make test against TS results as is recommended. I tried testing with Back-testing resolution on and off with 1m resolution and nothing changed. I looked at GSB reported trade times, prices etc. and most were very different than TS.

I have run out of ideas why these GSB results are so far off with TS results. All GSB strategies I put into TS reported as big losers compared to GSB results, which were polar opposite profitable.

I will attach the ES 3m txt file I am using.

Anybody with reason(s) and/or solutions for the issue I am having with GSB vs TS results is much appreciated.

Thank you.

send me team viewer details, im free in about an hour. Likely very simple to fix
check your moc are working.
add setexitonloclose; in ts

boosted - 3-7-2018 at 06:27 PM

I checked that it had MOC and it did but I also added setexitonclose just to be sure.
It didn't change anything.

By the way I am attaching a strategy (1 of hundreds) that doesn't match at all.

I sent you the Teamviewer info to your email.

Attachment: Login to view the details


admin - 3-7-2018 at 07:15 PM

Quote: Originally posted by boosted  
I checked that it had MOC and it did but I also added setexitonclose just to be sure.
It didn't change anything.

By the way I am attaching a strategy (1 of hundreds) that doesn't match at all.

I sent you the Teamviewer info to your email.

This is really simple to fix.
see this post.
http://trademaid.info/forum/post.php?action=edit&fid=1&tid=1...
Change the word inputs: to vars: in TS, and problem gone. One of the most common GSB user errors.

boosted - 3-7-2018 at 07:23 PM

Thank you Peter, appreciate the help.

admin - 3-7-2018 at 07:26 PM

Quote: Originally posted by boosted  
Thank you Peter, appreciate the help.

A pleasure. Nice when its so simple to fix. :)

Location of WF TS code

Gregorian - 4-7-2018 at 02:20 PM

In 47.10, where do we find the WF'd code to be moved over to TS/MC? Under the Script tab, all I see is the Optimized code, not the WF'd code.

Likewise, sometimes but not all the time, after a WF run has been completed, the Walk-Forward tab under the Settings tab, and the Walk-Forward tab are blank. It seems as though GSB doesn't always know that a WF run has been completed.

admin - 4-7-2018 at 04:24 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Gregorian  
In 47.10, where do we find the WF'd code to be moved over to TS/MC? Under the Script tab, all I see is the Optimized code, not the WF'd code.

Likewise, sometimes but not all the time, after a WF run has been completed, the Walk-Forward tab under the Settings tab, and the Walk-Forward tab are blank. It seems as though GSB doesn't always know that a WF run has been completed.

Here it is.


wfcode.png - 35kB

Gregorian - 4-7-2018 at 04:43 PM

In WF'ing around 8 strategies on three instances of GSB 47.10 thus far, I've not yet seen the - WF options appear in that drop down menu. Only the original TS and MC options appear.

WF.jpg - 1.2MB

admin - 4-7-2018 at 05:07 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Gregorian  
In WF'ing around 8 strategies on three instances of GSB 47.10 thus far, I've not yet seen the - WF options appear in that drop down menu. Only the original TS and MC options appear.


try clciking on the row again.
if that doesnt work send me teamviwer details

zdenekt - 5-7-2018 at 03:20 AM

I have a same bug all the time. No WFA code...and tried to click at least a hundred times.

No WFA code on 99% of strategies. Only sometimes I can see WFA code and when I click on different row and then click back, WFA code which was there, is no longer there.

Perhaps it would be better to go back to the old method of displaying code in tabs to prevent such bugs.

GSB_No WFA code.jpg - 97kB

admin - 5-7-2018 at 03:52 AM

you can try .17. Must upgrade workers and managers. No idea if its fixed but if not will roll back WF code.
With Gregorian, it was very intermittent. Some systems work fine when you click on them, and others never work no matter how often you click on them.
.17 updates for sql server a little less often to reduce sql server load than earlier versions

Later note. Programmers says issue is fixed in this build

Attachment: Login to view the details

boothy - 12-7-2018 at 12:44 AM

Hi Peter,

I have been running GSB with 3 workers for a few hours and then paused the process to start looking at the results. How long should it take for all unique systems to load into Manager?
As you can see in attached screenshot, the workers have created about 100k unique systems, its been 45min since I paused processing and only 16k are in the manager screen.

Cheers.

Capture8.PNG - 372kB

admin - 12-7-2018 at 02:03 AM

Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
Hi Peter,

I have been running GSB with 3 workers for a few hours and then paused the process to start looking at the results. How long should it take for all unique systems to load into Manager?
As you can see in attached screenshot, the workers have created about 100k unique systems, its been 45min since I paused processing and only 16k are in the manager screen.

Cheers.

Lots of possible answers.
Today we upgraded sql, and I had to kill all workers. (sorry) but the main programmer had just gone to sleep when there was a problem.
if you build systems in the manger via a worker, and say get 500 systems. You then build 600 systems on a new manager, the new manager will show 600 systems, but the worker 1100 systems
Hope that helps, but are trying to improve the potential load of sql server for GSB. The work around was 2 minute polling which gives a lag. We want to reduce this back to 30 seconds. Time for worker to respond is random time of 0 to polling time, + a bit of a additional delay

100k systems is likely too many. You should have tighter metrics. This will also reduce sql server load a bit too.


boothy - 12-7-2018 at 06:30 PM

Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
Hi Peter,

I have been running GSB with 3 workers for a few hours and then paused the process to start looking at the results. How long should it take for all unique systems to load into Manager?
As you can see in attached screenshot, the workers have created about 100k unique systems, its been 45min since I paused processing and only 16k are in the manager screen.

Cheers.

Lots of possible answers.
Today we upgraded sql, and I had to kill all workers. (sorry) but the main programmer had just gone to sleep when there was a problem.
if you build systems in the manger via a worker, and say get 500 systems. You then build 600 systems on a new manager, the new manager will show 600 systems, but the worker 1100 systems
Hope that helps, but are trying to improve the potential load of sql server for GSB. The work around was 2 minute polling which gives a lag. We want to reduce this back to 30 seconds. Time for worker to respond is random time of 0 to polling time, + a bit of a additional delay

100k systems is likely too many. You should have tighter metrics. This will also reduce sql server load a bit too.




Point taken about tighter metrics, but have been using the ESsystemstight settings for starters trying to get a baseline of how many workers I can run and not have problems.

ran another test this morning, only ran gsb for 5 to 10 min and got just over 2000 unique systems, then paused processing.
it has now been 3hrs since I paused and only 512 systems are showing in manager. I had exited out of gsb and re opened before starting new test.

I also changed in worker app settings auto share in network to false, hoping that may reduce internet upload.

Do workers running on my computer send results to the sql server and then back to manager?
If this is correct, why?

cheers.

Capture9.PNG - 379kB

admin - 12-7-2018 at 10:20 PM

Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
Hi Peter,

I have been running GSB with 3 workers for a few hours and then paused the process to start looking at the results. How long should it take for all unique systems to load into Manager?
As you can see in attached screenshot, the workers have created about 100k unique systems, its been 45min since I paused processing and only 16k are in the manager screen.

Cheers.

Lots of possible answers.
Today we upgraded sql, and I had to kill all workers. (sorry) but the main programmer had just gone to sleep when there was a problem.
if you build systems in the manger via a worker, and say get 500 systems. You then build 600 systems on a new manager, the new manager will show 600 systems, but the worker 1100 systems
Hope that helps, but are trying to improve the potential load of sql server for GSB. The work around was 2 minute polling which gives a lag. We want to reduce this back to 30 seconds. Time for worker to respond is random time of 0 to polling time, + a bit of a additional delay

100k systems is likely too many. You should have tighter metrics. This will also reduce sql server load a bit too.




Point taken about tighter metrics, but have been using the ESsystemstight settings for starters trying to get a baseline of how many workers I can run and not have problems.

ran another test this morning, only ran gsb for 5 to 10 min and got just over 2000 unique systems, then paused processing.
it has now been 3hrs since I paused and only 512 systems are showing in manager. I had exited out of gsb and re opened before starting new test.

I also changed in worker app settings auto share in network to false, hoping that may reduce internet upload.

Do workers running on my computer send results to the sql server and then back to manager?
If this is correct, why?

cheers.

One factor is, some systems might be duplicates, but I doubt that is the cause.
We are working on have a diagnostic duplicate system count.
changing autoshare in network wont change anything. All workers talk via sql server.
We are doing a lot of work in this area right now, included stress testing it.
do you have any exception files in the manager or worker folders in the exception folders?
I am going to talk to the lead programmer over this issue.
GSB used to share info via shared dropbox folder, but this was very problematic.
Big picture is we will resolve the issue, and cant support shared folder and sql server. Sorry for the loss of some systems. Issue needs to be fixed.

boothy - 13-7-2018 at 12:18 AM

Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by boothy  
Hi Peter,

I have been running GSB with 3 workers for a few hours and then paused the process to start looking at the results. How long should it take for all unique systems to load into Manager?
As you can see in attached screenshot, the workers have created about 100k unique systems, its been 45min since I paused processing and only 16k are in the manager screen.

Cheers.

Lots of possible answers.
Today we upgraded sql, and I had to kill all workers. (sorry) but the main programmer had just gone to sleep when there was a problem.
if you build systems in the manger via a worker, and say get 500 systems. You then build 600 systems on a new manager, the new manager will show 600 systems, but the worker 1100 systems
Hope that helps, but are trying to improve the potential load of sql server for GSB. The work around was 2 minute polling which gives a lag. We want to reduce this back to 30 seconds. Time for worker to respond is random time of 0 to polling time, + a bit of a additional delay

100k systems is likely too many. You should have tighter metrics. This will also reduce sql server load a bit too.




Point taken about tighter metrics, but have been using the ESsystemstight settings for starters trying to get a baseline of how many workers I can run and not have problems.

ran another test this morning, only ran gsb for 5 to 10 min and got just over 2000 unique systems, then paused processing.
it has now been 3hrs since I paused and only 512 systems are showing in manager. I had exited out of gsb and re opened before starting new test.

I also changed in worker app settings auto share in network to false, hoping that may reduce internet upload.

Do workers running on my computer send results to the sql server and then back to manager?
If this is correct, why?

cheers.

One factor is, some systems might be duplicates, but I doubt that is the cause.
We are working on have a diagnostic duplicate system count.
changing autoshare in network wont change anything. All workers talk via sql server.
We are doing a lot of work in this area right now, included stress testing it.
do you have any exception files in the manager or worker folders in the exception folders?
I am going to talk to the lead programmer over this issue.
GSB used to share info via shared dropbox folder, but this was very problematic.
Big picture is we will resolve the issue, and cant support shared folder and sql server. Sorry for the loss of some systems. Issue needs to be fixed.


No exception files from this mornings test, and only a couple from yesterday when I was processing for a few hours. (related to not being able to contact server and timing out)

I can understand why cloud workers would have to talk via sql server, but why do workers on my computer have to talk to the manager on my computer via the server?
I'm not very techy, but to me that seams to be a lot of info flying around over the internet for no reason.

Am I the only one with this issue??

admin - 13-7-2018 at 02:17 AM

Im not sure of others have the issue, but there is a lot work going on in GSB data base at the moment. Lots more programing work to use sql and to use communciation from workers to managers. Will let you know when I hear from the programer about the issue

Missing slippage and commission fields

Gregorian - 16-7-2018 at 12:58 PM

In 47.40, even with GUI-Advanced set to True, the Fitness and Report Slippage and Commission fields do not display. Have they been moved elsewhere?

admin - 16-7-2018 at 04:13 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Gregorian  
In 47.40, even with GUI-Advanced set to True, the Fitness and Report Slippage and Commission fields do not display. Have they been moved elsewhere?

I removed them as many users use different settings for reports and fitness. This slows gsb down a fair bit. Adding slippage and commission in fitness likely will do nothing if fitness = np*at
If you strongly want it back, I will add if for gsb in admin mode only

Gregorian - 16-7-2018 at 08:59 PM

I do not strongly want it back. It was a convenience, a feature long present in TSL, AT, and SQ, but not, strictly speaking, necessary.

admin - 16-7-2018 at 09:09 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Gregorian  
I do not strongly want it back. It was a convenience, a feature long present in TSL, AT, and SQ, but not, strictly speaking, necessary.

Try with GSB in admin mode.
See this post.
http://trademaid.info/forum/viewthread.php?tid=92
If that doesnt fix it and you want it back, I will add it in admin mode only.
Overall GSB uses are better without it. I think it was 15% or so degradation in speed if slippage reports<>slippage fitness

Carl - 18-7-2018 at 10:03 AM

Hi Peter,

I do like the possibility to be able to add the slippage figures in GSB.

So if it can be re-introduced, please do.

Thanks.

admin - 18-7-2018 at 04:10 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Carl  
Hi Peter,

I do like the possibility to be able to add the slippage figures in GSB.

So if it can be re-introduced, please do.

Thanks.

Minor bug, yes s&c for reports and fitness is gone. :(
Its supposed to be gone for fitness only.
It will be back soon.

Bruce - 25-7-2018 at 04:40 AM


Hi Peter, your email keeps getting bounced back!


The response was:
550 Unknown user


Final-Recipient: rfc822; info@trademaid.info
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Remote-MTA: dns; mail.trademaid.info. (162.218.228.242, the server for the
domain trademaid.info.)
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550 Unknown user
Last-Attempt-Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 03:24:01 -0700 (PDT)

admin - 25-7-2018 at 04:53 AM

Quote: Originally posted by TradingRails  

Hi Peter, your email keeps getting bounced back!


The response was:
550 Unknown user


Final-Recipient: rfc822; info@trademaid.info
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Remote-MTA: dns; mail.trademaid.info. (162.218.228.242, the server for the
domain trademaid.info.)
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550 Unknown user
Last-Attempt-Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 03:24:01 -0700 (PDT)

Thanks for that, as I didnt know. Ive been reviving the email on this domain just recently

Bruce - 25-7-2018 at 04:05 PM


Hi Peter,

I appear to have corrupted the data file structure in some way, as I go to check the data and find that this files appear to be missing in the shared folder. I then attempt to use the one in the data file under the C:\GSB\GSB (Managers)\Price Data and I'm instructed to use the shared dropbox folder. What have I done?

I hope the attached screenshot helps

Thanks.


Screen Shot 2018-07-26 at 9.57.24 AM.png - 785kB

admin - 25-7-2018 at 04:19 PM

Quote: Originally posted by TradingRails  

Hi Peter,

I appear to have corrupted the data file structure in some way, as I go to check the data and find that this files appear to be missing in the shared folder. I then attempt to use the one in the data file under the C:\GSB\GSB (Managers)\Price Data and I'm instructed to use the shared dropbox folder. What have I done?

I hope the attached screenshot helps

Thanks.

go to app settings data and set public data path here
C:\GSB\GSB (Managers)
Worse case re-install should over write any config files.
Let me know if it works.

Bruce - 27-7-2018 at 05:12 AM


Hi Peter,

I couldn't send via the help as the file format isn't supported, so I hope via the forum works for you.

Thanks.

Attachment: Login to view the details


admin - 27-7-2018 at 03:27 PM

Quote: Originally posted by TradingRails  

Hi Peter,

I couldn't send via the help as the file format isn't supported, so I hope via the forum works for you.

Thanks.

I got the file thanks. zip it up likely would have worked.
Will be looking at what you sent

eatrade - 27-7-2018 at 07:51 PM

I just installed the trial file GSB 47.44 build. July 24th 2018 and am surprise,d that the duration ist set to only 4 days left from the beginning. I thought that the trial period is 14 days. Is this a bug or indeed only 4 days to try the software?
Thank you very much in advance,

admin - 27-7-2018 at 09:25 PM

Quote: Originally posted by eatrade  
I just installed the trial file GSB 47.44 build. July 24th 2018 and am surprise,d that the duration ist set to only 4 days left from the beginning. I thought that the trial period is 14 days. Is this a bug or indeed only 4 days to try the software?
Thank you very much in advance,

This is a bug, and I think its fixed in the next version. However once you install your current version, the new version wont fix the issue.
I will email you a new file to fix this. Apologies for a bug.

cyrus68 - 30-7-2018 at 06:21 AM

I haven't tried to test systems on GSB for a good while. But seeing the possibility to test via verification price data, I decided to give it a try. I already had a successful NG model that produced some very attractive systems. NG as data1, plus data2, 3 and 4. It ran smoothly on 2 computers - the only glitch was that the manager did not aggregate all unique systems correctly.

I ran the model with the SAME SETTINGS as previously, except that verification data was included (NG as data1, plus data2, 3 and 4 - at a different frequency).

Problem #1. GSB produced no systems, nothing. I excluded the verification data. Still nothing.

Problem #2. on the 2nd computer running 6 workers, only one of the workers had copied the correct app and opt settings. The rest were running on opt and app settings from a previous run.

This was on build 47.49. Now, my problem is to figure out what was the last build that worked properly. I am not interested in running the test data and settings that come with GSB, but my own data and settings.

As I haven't run anything on GSB for a good many weeks, I will have to try various exe files and see which one works with the fewest bugs. Another issue is whether the old exe files will be compatible with the other files in the installed 47.49 directory.

All in all, an unfortunate state of affairs.

admin - 30-7-2018 at 07:04 AM

Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68  
I haven't tried to test systems on GSB for a good while. But seeing the possibility to test via verification price data, I decided to give it a try. I already had a successful NG model that produced some very attractive systems. NG as data1, plus data2, 3 and 4. It ran smoothly on 2 computers - the only glitch was that the manager did not aggregate all unique systems correctly.

I ran the model with the SAME SETTINGS as previously, except that verification data was included (NG as data1, plus data2, 3 and 4 - at a different frequency).

Problem #1. GSB produced no systems, nothing. I excluded the verification data. Still nothing.

Problem #2. on the 2nd computer running 6 workers, only one of the workers had copied the correct app and opt settings. The rest were running on opt and app settings from a previous run.

This was on build 47.49. Now, my problem is to figure out what was the last build that worked properly. I am not interested in running the test data and settings that come with GSB, but my own data and settings.

As I haven't run anything on GSB for a good many weeks, I will have to try various exe files and see which one works with the fewest bugs. Another issue is whether the old exe files will be compatible with the other files in the installed 47.49 directory.

All in all, an unfortunate state of affairs.

Just do a support upload, and I will look at it. Are all the workers the same version? old managers typically can drive newer build workers, but not the other way around. So far no other user complaints, but you can always go back to the last version you were happy with.

eatrade - 30-7-2018 at 08:27 AM

Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by eatrade  
I just installed the trial file GSB 47.44 build. July 24th 2018 and am surprise,d that the duration ist set to only 4 days left from the beginning. I thought that the trial period is 14 days. Is this a bug or indeed only 4 days to try the software?
Thank you very much in advance,

This is a bug, and I think its fixed in the next version. However once you install your current version, the new version wont fix the issue.
I will email you a new file to fix this. Apologies for a bug.


The trial period has not changed, it is no longer available today, I also installed 47.49a...

admin - 30-7-2018 at 03:48 PM

Quote: Originally posted by eatrade  
Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by eatrade  
I just installed the trial file GSB 47.44 build. July 24th 2018 and am surprise,d that the duration ist set to only 4 days left from the beginning. I thought that the trial period is 14 days. Is this a bug or indeed only 4 days to try the software?
Thank you very much in advance,

This is a bug, and I think its fixed in the next version. However once you install your current version, the new version wont fix the issue.
I will email you a new file to fix this. Apologies for a bug.


The trial period has not changed, it is no longer available today, I also installed 47.49a...

While I hope that 44.49a has fixed the expiry bug, if you have installed 49.44 first, then 49.49 will NOT fix the expiry.
please send me your teamviewer.com details and I will fix this asap. Sorry ofr inconvenience caused. I cant test this issue myself as I have no computers at all that have never had GSB run on them. info@trademaid.info

cyrus68 - 30-7-2018 at 10:38 PM

A month ago I could generate systems on GSB, with very few glitches. Coming back to GSB after a month, I encounter one problem after another. Previously, I could load saved systems and re-examine them. Now, it is impossible and I get multiple error messages. Also, as noted before, the same settings on the same data-sets, that generated good results, now produce nothing. And there is a problem with workers being unable to read the manager's settings that has nothing to do with different versions.

I have used GSB for over a year. So I'm not a novice. Right now, for me, this software has lost functionality. I can't do basic things that were possible previously. The most important thing for this sort of software is reliability and consistency. If I follow consistent rules in using the software, then I should see consistent outcomes. These are serious issues that need to be addressed.

admin - 31-7-2018 at 12:15 AM

Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68  
A month ago I could generate systems on GSB, with very few glitches. Coming back to GSB after a month, I encounter one problem after another. Previously, I could load saved systems and re-examine them. Now, it is impossible and I get multiple error messages. Also, as noted before, the same settings on the same data-sets, that generated good results, now produce nothing. And there is a problem with workers being unable to read the manager's settings that has nothing to do with different versions.

I have used GSB for over a year. So I'm not a novice. Right now, for me, this software has lost functionality. I can't do basic things that were possible previously. The most important thing for this sort of software is reliability and consistency. If I follow consistent rules in using the software, then I should see consistent outcomes. These are serious issues that need to be addressed.

Sorry you are frustrated. Until you do a support upload and or do teamviewer, I cant help you. Im using 53 workers right now, and its going fine for me. I loaded system a system from nov 2017 into 48.00 and it worked fine.

cyrus68 - 31-7-2018 at 01:12 AM

I would like to see solutions to some of the problems, whichever method works. I am not using your experimental data or settings.

Also, for the first time, I am seeing an error message regarding contracts. What are loaded contracts? My understanding is that you need to set the contract specs in the contract list under 'Tools".

The file name is NG.15.Minute.900.1430.NG_datexxx, which refers to the optimal exchange session time. My computer is on local time= central time US. So the appropriate MOC is set at 1330.

Contracts.png - 15kB

admin - 31-7-2018 at 02:39 AM

Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68  
I would like to see solutions to some of the problems, whichever method works. I am not using your experimental data or settings.

Also, for the first time, I am seeing an error message regarding contracts. What are loaded contracts? My understanding is that you need to set the contract specs in the contract list under 'Tools".

The file name is NG.15.Minute.900.1430.NG_datexxx, which refers to the optimal exchange session time. My computer is on local time= central time US. So the appropriate MOC is set at 1330.

That error shows your local contracts.txt file contained 1430, but your data file 1330. GSB wants to update this to 1330 (correct time)
GSB has hard coded times and contract data that will be automatically over written if you have your own contracts.txt file.

For other forum users, Cyrus's GSB did not appear to make systems. The metrics in training were loosened off, and the full period performance metrics loosened too. If you have nth set to 1, np and fitness should 1/2 as we have 1/2 the amount of trading days. However pearsons will also drop and the system is less likely to be as linear.
Also for NG we changed secondary filter to only user closed/closed, not the other 36 secondary filters. Normally if you use GA S.F. it will choose closed(minus or divide) regardless, and if it doesnt, the systems choose are not as good as CLoseD
For NG close/CloseD was the best S.F.
You can check whats going on in workers or stand alone by right clicking the top diag or latest diag tab and clicking refresh.
Takes a few minutes to produce systems.

cyrus68 - 1-8-2018 at 11:49 PM

Looking past the glitches, the new verification feature is excellent. New to me, because I hadn't used GSB for a good number of weeks.

I got another pop-up notification on contracts that makes little sense. I loaded the manager to test ES systems. First, I saved the new app settings. Then, I tried to save the opt settings and the notification popped up. What has NG got to do with it?

The correct specs for both ES and NG have been saved in the contracts list, a year ago. GSB is supposed to read the contract specs from that list.

This brings me to the conventional nomenclature for naming data files (txt) in GSB. The begin and end session times are based on the optimal custom settings in TS, based on the contract's exchange time. Your computer's time-zone setting will determine the actual begin and end session times, during which trading will take place. So, if your txt file is called NG.15.Minute.900.1430.NG_datexxx, the custom session refers to US Eastern time. And, if your computer is on US Central time, this means 800 to 1330. The data file will reflect the session times for Chicago, not NY.

So, where is the error? In the file name or somewhere else?

Contracts 2.png - 15kB

admin - 2-8-2018 at 01:13 AM

Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68  
Looking past the glitches, the new verification feature is excellent. New to me, because I hadn't used GSB for a good number of weeks.

I got another pop-up notification on contracts that makes little sense. I loaded the manager to test ES systems. First, I saved the new app settings. Then, I tried to save the opt settings and the notification popped up. What has NG got to do with it?

The correct specs for both ES and NG have been saved in the contracts list, a year ago. GSB is supposed to read the contract specs from that list.

This brings me to the conventional nomenclature for naming data files (txt) in GSB. The begin and end session times are based on the optimal custom settings in TS, based on the contract's exchange time. Your computer's time-zone setting will determine the actual begin and end session times, during which trading will take place. So, if your txt file is called NG.15.Minute.900.1430.NG_datexxx, the custom session refers to US Eastern time. And, if your computer is on US Central time, this means 800 to 1330. The data file will reflect the session times for Chicago, not NY.

So, where is the error? In the file name or somewhere else?

The GSB format is symbol.interval.type.anythinguLike.txt
What im doing myself for symbols that can have mutiple close times is
symbolMOC.minute.CustomSessionTimeStart_to_CustomSessionTimeEnd_timezone_startDate_endDate.txt

CL1330.30.Minute.900_TO_1430_centralUSAtime_200609_20180609
You then need to copy the CL contract under contracts from CL to CL1330 and set the Moc time to 1330.

What moc time do you have in C:\GSB\GSB (Managers)\data\contracts.txt
Bottom line is you should click yes to update.
All this session time stuff is confusing for most users (even me) as TS Custom session time refers to exchange time, but the bars are written local time.
Hope this reply helps. Thanks for the comments on how well verification data works.

ProbTrader - 2-8-2018 at 02:04 AM

Hi all

Has anybody put thinking/analysis into what the "best" fitness functions for OOS/WF might be, and incorporated the fact that this may differ between instruments/asset classes? Its easy to enough to choose a fitness function that produces a good looking IS equity curve (eg smooth with low drawdowns and high CAGR etc) but I have found that the preferred fitness functions for IS are not necessarily and generally the same as the preferred for OOS. In other words, fitness function X may produce the best IS curves, but fitness function Y may actually hold better OOS. Thanks.

cyrus68 - 2-8-2018 at 02:10 AM

My file names and contract specs have been the same since last year. My computer is on central time and the MOC times reflect this fact. I re-checked them and they are correct. I reiterated the relationship between exchange time, TS custom session time and the computer's local time to avoid any confusion and pinpoint possible changes in GSB that I'm not aware of.

The error notification refers to NG when I am setting up a system for ES. Bizarre indeed. In any case, if this is a harmless new bug, I can ignore it.

admin - 2-8-2018 at 02:13 AM

Quote: Originally posted by ProbTrader  
Hi all

Has anybody put thinking/analysis into what the "best" fitness functions for OOS/WF might be, and incorporated the fact that this may differ between instruments/asset classes? Its easy to enough to choose a fitness function that produces a good looking IS equity curve (eg smooth with low drawdowns and high CAGR etc) but I have found that the preferred fitness functions for IS are not necessarily and generally the same as the preferred for OOS. In other words, fitness function X may produce the best IS curves, but fitness function Y may actually hold better OOS. Thanks.

My post today on CL implied that pearsons was much better than NP*AT
http://trademaid.info/forum/viewthread.php?tid=117

cyrus68 - 2-8-2018 at 02:30 AM

Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by ProbTrader  
Hi all

Has anybody put thinking/analysis into what the "best" fitness functions for OOS/WF might be, and incorporated the fact that this may differ between instruments/asset classes? Its easy to enough to choose a fitness function that produces a good looking IS equity curve (eg smooth with low drawdowns and high CAGR etc) but I have found that the preferred fitness functions for IS are not necessarily and generally the same as the preferred for OOS. In other words, fitness function X may produce the best IS curves, but fitness function Y may actually hold better OOS. Thanks.

My post today on CL implied that pearsons was much better than NP*AT
http://trademaid.info/forum/viewthread.php?tid=117


Was the fitness criteria set as NP*Avg trade*Pearson or simply Pearson?
I would like to try NP*Avg trade*Sharpe, but haven't yet.

admin - 2-8-2018 at 03:26 AM

Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68  
Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by ProbTrader  
Hi all

Has anybody put thinking/analysis into what the "best" fitness functions for OOS/WF might be, and incorporated the fact that this may differ between instruments/asset classes? Its easy to enough to choose a fitness function that produces a good looking IS equity curve (eg smooth with low drawdowns and high CAGR etc) but I have found that the preferred fitness functions for IS are not necessarily and generally the same as the preferred for OOS. In other words, fitness function X may produce the best IS curves, but fitness function Y may actually hold better OOS. Thanks.

My post today on CL implied that pearsons was much better than NP*AT
http://trademaid.info/forum/viewthread.php?tid=117


Was the fitness criteria set as NP*Avg trade*Pearson or simply Pearson?
I would like to try NP*Avg trade*Sharpe, but haven't yet.

fitness was np*at only

ProbTrader - 2-8-2018 at 06:34 AM

I think the choice of fitness function is one of the core assumptions of any system you build. If you're wrong here, every next step of the process will rest on a bad assumption. And the research I have done suggests that the optimal fitness function can vary greatly from case to case (obviously beware of over-fitting etc), the same way that any other system input can and do.

Two such fitness criteria I think GSB would benefit from having as an output in the "lower output window"/GUI are Sharpe and the t-test.

Petzy - 2-8-2018 at 11:40 AM

I have tried pearson * NetProfitOverDrawdown. It seems to work quite ok. But I have not yet finnished testing

rws - 2-8-2018 at 04:50 PM

You can have great fitness if you allow very few trades. The fitness and the number of trades are both important. Too few trades have no statistical meaning and are easier to curve fit.

cyrus68 - 3-8-2018 at 01:41 AM

rws is correct. There is also another reason why more trades are better than fewer. If your system deteriorates in live trading, you can pick this up sooner if the system executes many trades. This allows you to act in stopping the losses.

As for the Sharpe Ratio, in this context, it measures return per unit of volatility, not risk. Drawdown is a better measure of risk. If the division operator was available in GSB for setting fitness criteria, we could construct NP/(Avg of top 5 drawdowns).

I am not in favour of complex fitness functions. The criteria that are included should make sense. For example, %profitable and PF both measure the success rate, and it is redundant to include both.

A while back, I was searching for a GSB video and came across one by TSL, which I don't own. Here is a list of their fitness function criteria. They have pretty much stacked the shelf with everything. Note that #30 is the Sharpe Ratio + Total Trades. A number of the others use the addition operator.

fitness criteria.png - 370kB

cyrus68 - 23-8-2018 at 05:33 AM

I just switched from 47.49 to 48.16. When I want to insert a dataset in the relevant slot and click on "save", I am immediately presented with a huge list of contracts and indices, telling me that they are invalid price file contracts. Never mind that this is irrelevant to the dataset I am trying to insert.

Essentially it is reading all contracts and indices in the price data list and checking to see if it is in the contracts list. I can't ignore the message because it won't allow me to insert the selected dataset. Actually, I am not interested in verifying on other markets. Also, I use a lot of indices and contracts as secondary data. Entering them on the contracts list is, for me, unnecessary and a pain in the neck. How is it possible to disable or get past this nasty message? Right now, I have returned to 47.49.

admin - 23-8-2018 at 05:39 AM

Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68  
I just switched from 47.49 to 48.16. When I want to insert a dataset in the relevant slot and click on "save", I am immediately presented with a huge list of contracts and indices, telling me that they are invalid price file contracts. Never mind that this is irrelevant to the dataset I am trying to insert.

Essentially it is reading all contracts and indices in the price data list and checking to see if it is in the contracts list. I can't ignore the message because it won't allow me to insert the selected dataset. Actually, I am not interested in verifying on other markets. Also, I use a lot of indices and contracts as secondary data. Entering them on the contracts list is, for me, unnecessary and a pain in the neck. How is it possible to disable or get past this nasty message? Right now, I have returned to 47.49.

This was in red on the release notes. As we have closedbpv, you must add all secondary data into your contracts list.

cyrus68 - 23-8-2018 at 05:51 AM

Quelle horreur.

cyrus68 - 27-8-2018 at 04:19 AM

Has anybody been able to generate walk-forward results in build 48.16?

Let’s take the CL example used in the video, for the sake of familiarity. You load the 29 30 and 31 min datasets, set “Opt price data” to False and generate systems.

Next, you want to run WF on a given system. So, you load the 30 min dataset in “WF price data”. Then, you run the WF. Except that, on completion, you don’t see the OOS and Current curves, no reports and no script.

admin - 27-8-2018 at 05:11 AM

Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68  
Has anybody been able to generate walk-forward results in build 48.16?

Let’s take the CL example used in the video, for the sake of familiarity. You load the 29 30 and 31 min datasets, set “Opt price data” to False and generate systems.

Next, you want to run WF on a given system. So, you load the 30 min dataset in “WF price data”. Then, you run the WF. Except that, on completion, you don’t see the OOS and Current curves, no reports and no script.
You should be on 48.24 build. Uploaded in the beta section.
WF is not perfect but getting better. The only current bug I am aware of is often wf to cloud will be on nth=1 not nth = all. This is always the case for me, but is linked to something in config and will work fine for some users. Wf to local didnt have this bug

cyrus68 - 27-8-2018 at 10:37 PM

I tried WF in 48.24. I ran one WF. Upon completion, there were no curves and no reports. So I double-clicked it, whereupon the curves and reports appeared. Only problem was that I had loaded the 30min dataset in "WF price data" field. But, it ran WF on the 25min dataset.

So, the basic question is: how do you select the dataset for which you want to do WF?
How do you select an alternative dataset to do WF for the same system? In your CL example, let's say you want to run WF on 30min and then on 31min. What's the procedure? What are the steps?

admin - 28-8-2018 at 12:15 AM

Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68  
I tried WF in 48.24. I ran one WF. Upon completion, there were no curves and no reports. So I double-clicked it, whereupon the curves and reports appeared. Only problem was that I had loaded the 30min dataset in "WF price data" field. But, it ran WF on the 25min dataset.

So, the basic question is: how do you select the dataset for which you want to do WF?
How do you select an alternative dataset to do WF for the same system? In your CL example, let's say you want to run WF on 30min and then on 31min. What's the procedure? What are the steps?

WF will be opt price data if WF price data is blank.
Otherwise put your WF price data with the data you want.
If that doesnt work, time to do teamviwer.com
I critical question to ask. does WF on 30 min or 29,30,31 min bars give better out of sample results. Im looking into that now.

cyrus68 - 28-8-2018 at 05:03 AM

I had 3 datasets loaded in "Opt price data": 25 30 35.
I had 30min loaded in "WF price data". What it did was to run WF on 25. According to your comments, it should have run WF on 30min.

If I leave "WF price data" blank, on which of 25 30 35 will it run WF? Seems it will grab the first dataset.

Also, I ran GSB with "Optimise price data" set to True. When I tried to verify, all the scores were 0/0, which is nonsense; based on previous trials.
It did, however, identify which frequency had been selected as optimal. In the previous build, the verification was done correctly and the graph showed all the information.

I am following the rules and getting odd results.
If you have time, maybe we can do TV tomorrow morning.

admin - 28-8-2018 at 05:12 AM

Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68  
I had 3 datasets loaded in "Opt price data": 25 30 35.
I had 30min loaded in "WF price data". What it did was to run WF on 25. According to your comments, it should have run WF on 30min.
CORRECT
If I leave "WF price data" blank, on which of 25 30 35 will it run WF? Seems it will grab the first dataset.
IT COULD DO THIS IF OPTIMIZE DATA SET IS TRUE. IF ITS FALSE IT SHOULD NOT DO THIS

Also, I ran GSB with "Optimise price data" set to True. When I tried to verify, all the scores were 0/0, which is nonsense; based on previous trials.
I HAVE NEVER USED THIS FEATURE YET. MIGHT HAVE A BUG, I DONT KNOW
It did, however, identify which frequency had been selected as optimal. In the previous build, the verification was done correctly and the graph showed all the information.

I am following the rules and getting odd results.
If you have time, maybe we can do TV tomorrow morning.
HAPPY TO DO THAT. EMAIL WHEN YOUR UP

admin - 29-8-2018 at 01:25 AM

Quote: Originally posted by cyrus68  
I had 3 datasets loaded in "Opt price data": 25 30 35.
I had 30min loaded in "WF price data". What it did was to run WF on 25. According to your comments, it should have run WF on 30min.

If I leave "WF price data" blank, on which of 25 30 35 will it run WF? Seems it will grab the first dataset.

Also, I ran GSB with "Optimise price data" set to True. When I tried to verify, all the scores were 0/0, which is nonsense; based on previous trials.
It did, however, identify which frequency had been selected as optimal. In the previous build, the verification was done correctly and the graph showed all the information.

I am following the rules and getting odd results.
If you have time, maybe we can do TV tomorrow morning.

48.26 fixed the wf on 25 min, instead of 30.

admin - 2-9-2018 at 05:04 PM

ts10
can anyone give comments if TS10 is ok for live trading? ie stable and no significant bugs?

Bruce - 2-9-2018 at 09:37 PM


I haven't migrated to it yet, as a general rule I wait until there's been a number of updates before upgrading.

Petzy - 3-9-2018 at 02:15 AM

I tried TradeStation 10 for maybe 4-6 months ago believing it would have fewer bugs and that it would be a 64 bit application. Turns out it is basically version 9.5 with a newer look, but more bugs and still a 32 bit application.

Switching to version 10 gives you nothing in my opinion.
If I had time to switch to anything it would be MultiCharts for the 64 bit and fewer bugs.
I use TradeStation 9.5 because of the data feed and the connection to broker. I would consider MultiCharts if the datafeed/broker were better. I would not consider Tradestation 10.

Regards,
Peter G

eastpeace - 20-9-2018 at 11:14 PM

Hello everyone,

I have 2 questions.

1, I have get some strategies, all the entry type are "buy/sellshort 1 contracts this bar on close".

How to set that as "buy 1 contracts next bar at market"?

2, I have only MC, no TS.

Norm2 function compile with errors,

“MultiCharts Standard does not allow using the following reserved words: DefineDLLFunc, External, External Method. The words is available in MultiCharts Gold.”

So, I have to comment the first line out.

External: "TradeStationUtilsRc7b.dll", {success}bool, "WriteFileCpp", {path}string, {text}string, {delayFileWrite}int;

Does that matter?

eastpeace - 20-9-2018 at 11:14 PM

Hello everyone,

I have 2 questions.

1, I have get some strategies, all the entry type are "buy/sellshort 1 contracts this bar on close".

How to set that as "buy 1 contracts next bar at market"?

2, I have only MC, no TS.

Norm2 function compile with errors,

“MultiCharts Standard does not allow using the following reserved words: DefineDLLFunc, External, External Method. The words is available in MultiCharts Gold.”

So, I have to comment the first line out.

External: "TradeStationUtilsRc7b.dll", {success}bool, "WriteFileCpp", {path}string, {text}string, {delayFileWrite}int;

Does that matter?

admin - 20-9-2018 at 11:46 PM

Quote: Originally posted by eastpeace  
Hello everyone,

I have 2 questions.

1, I have get some strategies, all the entry type are "buy/sellshort 1 contracts this bar on close".

How to set that as "buy 1 contracts next bar at market"?


2, I have only MC, no TS.

Norm2 function compile with errors,

“MultiCharts Standard does not allow using the following reserved words: DefineDLLFunc, External, External Method. The words is available in MultiCharts Gold.”

So, I have to comment the first line out.

External: "TradeStationUtilsRc7b.dll", {success}bool, "WriteFileCpp", {path}string, {text}string, {delayFileWrite}int;

Does that matter?

1) Currently only This bar at market supported. Other entry types are in the pipeline. Next bar at market buys at the open, which is later. The earlier the order the better.
2) Norm2 is legacy GSB code. It shouldnt be needed. The dll was just a faster way to write files, and I dont think GSB uses it. It should not have been included with the pla

eastpeace - 25-9-2018 at 02:31 AM

Thank you, admin.

I will do some sim trade for test.

Is the MaxBarsBack number always 500? Why? Can it be reseted?

And 2nd, the data have 3 parts, 40% for training, 50% for test, 10% for validation. But the graphs above have no validation part showing. And the PF-V,NP/DD-V are blank. -S are equal to -SV.

admin - 25-9-2018 at 03:20 AM

Quote: Originally posted by eastpeace  
Thank you, admin.

I will do some sim trade for test.

Is the MaxBarsBack number always 500? Why? Can it be reseted?

And 2nd, the data have 3 parts, 40% for training, 50% for test, 10% for validation. But the graphs above have no validation part showing. And the PF-V,NP/DD-V are blank. -S are equal to -SV.

maxbars should never be changed. Otherwise you may get GSB<>TS
Im unclear what graphs you mean. My response is a guess to what you say. When doing Nth tests, I do 100% test, as we then have every second day un seen data.

eastpeace - 25-9-2018 at 08:31 PM

What I am mean is that,

Even when I divide the data into 3 sections, training, test, validation.

But the generated strategies's equity curve just show training and test part.

The validation stats in the below table are also empty.

20180926102206.png - 282kB

admin - 25-9-2018 at 11:30 PM

Quote: Originally posted by eastpeace  
What I am mean is that,

Even when I divide the data into 3 sections, training, test, validation.

But the generated strategies's equity curve just show training and test part.

The validation stats in the below table are also empty.

As a test put a higher percent. Check dates on left side is set to all

eastpeace - 26-9-2018 at 02:55 AM

Is it right?

The training part is negative in equity curve. But the stats below are positive.



gsbprob.png - 190kB

Attachment: Login to view the details

Attachment: Login to view the details


admin - 26-9-2018 at 03:21 AM

Quote: Originally posted by eastpeace  
Is it right?

The training part is negative in equity curve. But the stats below are positive.


Sorry, but im not clear what your asking. Weren't you looking for validation stats?

kelsotrader - 26-9-2018 at 04:11 AM

I have moved this Question.

I have a several queries that as yet have not been able to find answers for.
1: The file named GSB.pdb that accompanies beta upgrades: Is in necessary to replace existing files of the same name, and what does it do.
2: When switching from a testing strategy in TS to a live or demo system what should the lookback bars or days, months be set to.
3: I have noticed that on one strategy that I traded live that the number of trades being executed on TS do not correspond with trades when TS is asked to be in backtesting mode. While others are almost exact. What could be the cause of the variation.
4: When using TS analyzer and bringing up a trade list it cannot be exported in XML format for importing into Advanced portfolio analyser.
Is there a solution to exporting trades so Portfolio Analyser can pick them up.:fake sniffle:

Answers are from Peter.
1: It is required for crashes
2: 500
3: Unknown
4: Have you tried Portfolio Analyser.

eastpeace - 26-9-2018 at 06:27 PM

Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by eastpeace  
Is it right?

The training part is negative in equity curve. But the stats below are positive.


Sorry, but im not clear what your asking. Weren't you looking for validation stats?




This is a new question, not about the validation part showing or stats.

The problem is that earning in the training part according to the equity curves looks ugly, but the stats in the below table are positive. Which one is right?

admin - 26-9-2018 at 07:04 PM

Quote: Originally posted by eastpeace  
Quote: Originally posted by admin  
Quote: Originally posted by eastpeace  
Is it right?

The training part is negative in equity curve. But the stats below are positive.


Sorry, but im not clear what your asking. Weren't you looking for validation stats?




This is a new question, not about the validation part showing or stats.

The problem is that earning in the training part according to the equity curves looks ugly, but the stats in the below table are positive. Which one is right?

double click on a row, and see if the results are correct. You shouldnt normally see a curve where training is negitive, as the training filters prevent this. Unless a double click fixes this, send me your teamviewer details

eastpeace - 27-9-2018 at 01:48 AM

hello,sir

I see the connection.
I think the teamviewer is ok now. Please try again. Thank you

ProbTrader - 27-9-2018 at 05:30 AM

Hello all

So I just started to (try to) transfer some of my systems from GSB to TS. I am running into an issue with the TS code however. For the system below, I want to exit every trade at 2200 hrs (local GMT +1 time). It works perfectly fine on GSB. But on TS, the code generated by GSB, does not work flawlessly. The trades that are entered after 22:00 (eg at 22:20), are exited on the same bar/day. In GSB, this is handled correctly (given my inputs), ie all trades are exited at 22:00, either the following day if the trade is entered before 00:00, or the same day if the trade is entered after 00:00.

Question: How could I get TS to replicate this exactly? Just cutting and pasting the code as is does not seem to work. And as I am a complete illiterate in EL, I don't know how to adjust the code to accomplish this. Could somebody please be kind and let me know how the code needs to be adjusted in order to create the identical trade signals in TS as I am getting in GSB. Thanks in advance.

TS code:


////Contract's Session Close
If (TimeHms >= 220000) Then
Begin
BuyToCover this bar on close;
Sell this bar on close;
End;

SetExitOnClose;

// Exit Minutes
If BarDateTime.ELDateTimeEx >= tradeExitTime Then
Begin
BuyToCover this bar on close;
Sell this bar on close;
tradeExitTime = 1000000000;
End;

// Trading Dates
If Not ((dateYmd >= 20000101 And dateYmd <= 20181231)) Then
Begin
BuyToCover this bar on close;
Sell this bar on close;
End;

// Result and decision
result = ((GSB_Norm2(TrueRange of Data(i1Data), 11, 100) of Data(i1Data) * i1Weight) * ((GSB_Norm2(GSB_FastK(i2stockLength) of Data(i2Data), 11, 100) of Data(i2Data) * i2Weight) * ((GSB_Norm2(GSB_Decycler(i3cutoff) of Data(i3Data), 11, 100) of Data(i3Data) * i3Weight) * (GSB_Norm2(GSB_Highest(High, i4length) of Data(i4Data), 11, 100) of Data(i4Data) * i4Weight))));
result = IFF(AbsValue(result) > zs, result, 0);
decision = GSB_Decision(result, 1, entryParams);

sfResult = GSB_Norm2(GSB_CloseOverPrevCloseD of Data(iSFData), 11, 100) of Data(iSFData) * iSFWeight;
sfResult = IFF(AbsValue(sfResult) > zs, sfResult, 0);
sfDecision = GSB_Decision(sfResult, 2, sfEntryLevel);

// Entry-filter check
If (dateYmd > beginDate And dateYmd <= endDate)
And ((dateYmd >= 20000101 And dateYmd <= 20181231))
And (Not (TimeHms >= 220000 And TimeHms <= 220001)) Then
Begin
// Buy/Sell
If decision = 1 And sfDecision = 1 Then
Begin
Buy("Long entry") 1 contracts this bar on close;
tradeExitTime = GSB_CalcDateTime(BarDateTime.ELDateTimeEx, exitMinutesValue);
End
Else If decision = -1 And sfDecision = -1 Then
Begin
SellShort("Short entry") 1 contracts this bar on close;
tradeExitTime = GSB_CalcDateTime(BarDateTime.ELDateTimeEx, exitMinutesValue);
End;
End;


admin - 27-9-2018 at 01:53 PM

Quote: Originally posted by ProbTrader  
Hello all

So I just started to (try to) transfer some of my systems from GSB to TS. I am running into an issue with the TS code however. For the system below, I want to exit every trade at 2200 hrs (local GMT +1 time). It works perfectly fine on GSB. But on TS, the code generated by GSB, does not work flawlessly. The trades that are entered after 22:00 (eg at 22:20), are exited on the same bar/day. In GSB, this is handled correctly (given my inputs), ie all trades are exited at 22:00, either the following day if the trade is entered before 00:00, or the same day if the trade is entered after 00:00.

Question: How could I get TS to replicate this exactly? Just cutting and pasting the code as is does not seem to work. And as I am a complete illiterate in EL, I don't know how to adjust the code to accomplish this. Could somebody please be kind and let me know how the code needs to be adjusted in order to create the identical trade signals in TS as I am getting in GSB. Thanks in advance.

TS code:


////Contract's Session Close
If (TimeHms >= 220000) Then
Begin
BuyToCover this bar on close;
Sell this bar on close;
End;

SetExitOnClose;

// Exit Minutes
If BarDateTime.ELDateTimeEx >= tradeExitTime Then
Begin
BuyToCover this bar on close;
Sell this bar on close;
tradeExitTime = 1000000000;
End;

// Trading Dates
If Not ((dateYmd >= 20000101 And dateYmd <= 20181231)) Then
Begin
BuyToCover this bar on close;
Sell this bar on close;
End;

// Result and decision
result = ((GSB_Norm2(TrueRange of Data(i1Data), 11, 100) of Data(i1Data) * i1Weight) * ((GSB_Norm2(GSB_FastK(i2stockLength) of Data(i2Data), 11, 100) of Data(i2Data) * i2Weight) * ((GSB_Norm2(GSB_Decycler(i3cutoff) of Data(i3Data), 11, 100) of Data(i3Data) * i3Weight) * (GSB_Norm2(GSB_Highest(High, i4length) of Data(i4Data), 11, 100) of Data(i4Data) * i4Weight))));
result = IFF(AbsValue(result) > zs, result, 0);
decision = GSB_Decision(result, 1, entryParams);

sfResult = GSB_Norm2(GSB_CloseOverPrevCloseD of Data(iSFData), 11, 100) of Data(iSFData) * iSFWeight;
sfResult = IFF(AbsValue(sfResult) > zs, sfResult, 0);
sfDecision = GSB_Decision(sfResult, 2, sfEntryLevel);

// Entry-filter check
If (dateYmd > beginDate And dateYmd <= endDate)
And ((dateYmd >= 20000101 And dateYmd <= 20181231))
And (Not (TimeHms >= 220000 And TimeHms <= 220001)) Then
Begin
// Buy/Sell
If decision = 1 And sfDecision = 1 Then
Begin
Buy("Long entry") 1 contracts this bar on close;
tradeExitTime = GSB_CalcDateTime(BarDateTime.ELDateTimeEx, exitMinutesValue);
End
Else If decision = -1 And sfDecision = -1 Then
Begin
SellShort("Short entry") 1 contracts this bar on close;
tradeExitTime = GSB_CalcDateTime(BarDateTime.ELDateTimeEx, exitMinutesValue);
End;
End;


try changing this from
Entry-filter check
If (dateYmd > beginDate And dateYmd <= endDate)
And ((dateYmd >= 20000101 And dateYmd <= 20181231))
And (Not (TimeHms >= 220000 And TimeHms <= 220001)) Then
to


Entry-filter check
If (dateYmd > beginDate And dateYmd <= endDate)
And ((dateYmd >= 20000101 And dateYmd <= 20181231))
And (Not (TimeHms >= 220000 )) Then

ProbTrader - 27-9-2018 at 03:11 PM

Thanks Peter.

The solution you posted takes out the possibility of entering and exiting on the same bar by excluding all trades that may otherwise be entered between 22:00 and 00:00. Excluding these trades doesn't solve the issue unfortunately. The system would now miss out any potential trades between 22:00 and 00:00, which is not the intention and is also not what GSB does.

Solving by excluding trades will obviously become an even bigger factor if the close chosen would be at say 17:00 (in which case no trades would be entered between 17:00 and 00:00, which is neither the intention nor desireable).

Appreciate your help resolving this in a way that makes the trade rules/logic identical in GSB and the EL code it is generating.


ProbTrader - 27-9-2018 at 03:28 PM

To further clarify (with relation to above script)...

Current GSB logic:

If enter at < 22:00 on DAY 0, then exit at 22:00 on DAY 0
If enter at > 22:00 on DAY 0, then exit at 22:00 on DAY 1

If the auto-generated EL code for the above is run in TS, this TS logic and trades will not be identical.
Thus, some sort of adjustment is needed the TS code.

Thanks again.

 Pages:  1  2    4    6  ..  25