Errors, bugs, questions - page 70

[depth_finde]

I have read the whole thing several times and still do not understand the situation with 15 lots.

If possible, let's break it down on the fingers.

Example: We have a position of 15 lots for one symbol (only one symbol is considered), ACCOUNT_LIMIT_VOLUME=15.

Check closing: if we set the market order to close in 5 lots, the position will be reduced,

What if the market order increases the position?

Since you say that the server does not check the direction, a limit violation will be detected after the fact ?

Then it is not at all clear why pending orders are included into calculation of a limit and market ones are not ?

And finally, if the limit also applies to market orders, then the question remains: how do I close a 15 lot position without using a stop loss?

[Rashid Umarov]

depth_finde:.

Affirmative: position 15 lots for one instrument (only one instrument in question), ACCOUNT_LIMIT_VOLUME=15.

Check closing: if we place a market order to close 5 lots, the position will be reduced,

but what if the market order increases the position?

Get error 10034 from the Return Codes section of the trade server:

Code	Identifier	Description
10034	TRADE_RETCODE_LIMIT_VOLUME	Limit of order and position volume for the given symbol has been reached

[Rashid Umarov]

depth_finde:

Then it's not at all clear why the pauses are included in the limit count and the market pauses are not?

"Because you can't be pretty like that" (c).

That's so the server doesn't get brainwashed by all these "ifs". The competitor's qualifications should be enough to calculate everything on their own. If you need it that badly, enter and exit the market.

[Rashid Umarov]

depth_finde:

And finally, if the limitations also apply to market orders, then the question remains: how do you close a 15-lot position without using a stop loss?

Close successively with market orders of 5 lots each.

[depth_finde]

Rosh:

"Because you can't be pretty like that" (c).

That's why the server won't get brainwashed by all these "ifs". The qualification of the participant should be enough to calculate everything himself. If you need it that badly, enter and exit the market.

"Because you can't be pretty like that" (c). --> we'll take that as an expression of humour.

So why do you want to mess with the server's mind? Why do you want to put a pending order in constraints?

in case of violation of the condition when executing an order, issue error 10034 like in the market one, and that's it,

and here's the situation you didn't take the pending order because a limit was exceeded and five minutes later the position has changed, an earlier placed pending order has triggered and now with the new situation the limit with a previously rejected pending order is not exceeded, but now we will have to make a new request and the main thing is to trace the situation when an pending order is not accepted according to this condition and place it again, we will have to specify the condition so the same pending order is not placed twice, but it contradicts the condition that if the pending order is not placed you should place it again, which means we will have to adjust these two conditions so they don't contradict each other.

Isn't it easier not to set limits to pending orders and execute order on the fact as with the market one?

[Renat Fatkhullin]

depth_finde:

Wouldn't it be easier not to put restrictions on pending orders but to execute the restriction after the fact like with the market one?

Not easier, but more complicated, both technically and organisationally.

Once you have accepted an order, you cannot go anywhere - otherwise the whole Internet will moan about how the orders are cancelled.

[Rashid Umarov]

depth_finde:

And here is the situation you didn't accept the pending order because a limit was exceeded and after five minutes the position has changed, an already set pending order has triggered and now the limit with the new situation is not exceeded, taking into consideration the previous pending order, but now we will have to calculate a new request and the main thing is to trace the situation of pending order not being accepted according to this condition and place it again, we will have to specify the condition so the same pending order is not placed twice, but it contradicts the condition that if pending order is not placed, we should place it again, which means we will have to reconcile these two conditions to avoid them contradicting each other.

Isn't it easier not to set limits on pending orders and execute order on the actual order like on the market order?

You have shown yourself why they cannot be done. Read the paragraph in your message that I quoted and think - who needs it? Do not forget that on a single trading server there will be hundreds, thousands or even tens of thousands of accounts. A trade server doesn't provide individual service for just your account.

Rules are rules and they are set.

[depth_finde]

Renat:

Roch:

I see, thank you for the clarification.

[gumgum]

How do I put the x86 terminal on the x64 axis?

[Renat Fatkhullin]

gumgum:
How do I install the x86 terminal on the x64 axis?

Run the installer with the /32 switch

mt5setup.exe /32