Wishes for MQL5 - page 112
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
The important thing here is to realise the problem, not to run to other sources.
Open the Broco terminal and count how many instruments there are.
(and this is the direction in which MT5 is moving).
Now, just scroll through them, that is, open the weekly chart, to get an idea about the instrument, worth or not worth doing it. Right now it costs 25Kb per instrument. I hope my point is clear.
It's worth a try. You'll find a lot more.
And if you don't use the tool, there's practically no information.
Try it! Really.
And you get paid for information everywhere. Here with bits and baits...
the glorious 90s:
How to change a Megabyte with one bit?
To change gender is to become a bat!
Well, you don't... At 2MB per instrument, you'll need to download it. For scrolling :))))
.
ps.
Now I've got it :) about the reason for misunderstanding my words, which suggest to look something somewhere by other sources...
I'm talking about "scrolling" in automatic mode with MT tools, sifting out instruments that don't meet the primary conditions, making a list of promising ones for further processing.
The word "junk" has been applied to huge databases of minute data at 2MB per instrument.
What are they for? Totally useless for the most part!
(here is a kind of "data compression" turned upside down)
Now let's multiply by number of instruments and get 500*2MB = 1000MB
Now let's not forget that each individual DC loads its own databases.
(I have 15 МТ4 from different brokerage companies - here we have both demo and real)
For equilibrium we take 10 pcs. Then we get 10*1000MB = 10000MB
And now I will ask a question:
IS THIS NORMAL?
.
zy. I was not looking for the abnormality, the abnormality itself comes out. You can, of course, turn a blind eye and ignore it, and pretend that 'everything is fine' ...
10GB of information is fine, on any drive and most flash drives it fits easily. By the way, many computer games, absolutely senseless in contrast, weigh the same.
Don't make up problems where there aren't any.
The one-minute history, from which all other timeframes are recalculated afterwards (in order to avoid synchronization problems), has been requested from meta-quotes for a long time.
And now we have a normal one-minute history - and it's good.
By the way, downloaded from the Internet is not 10GB but much less. Because of compression.
10GB of data is normal, it's easy to fit on any drive and most flash drives. By the way, many computer games, absolutely meaningless in contrast, weigh the same.
There is no need to make up problems where there are none.
The one-minute history, from which all other timeframes are recalculated (in order to avoid synchronisation problems), has been requested from meta-quotes for a long time.
And now we have a normal one-minute history - and it's good.
By the way, downloaded from the Internet is not 10GB but much less. Because of the compression.
hehe :))
about "by the way, many computer games, absolutely meaningless in contrast, weigh the same" - I hope this is only "by the way", and certainly NOT as an argument, much less a weighty one.
.
"No need to invent problems where there are none" - there are none yet, until encountered, until realised...
.
"Been begging from the methaquots for a long time" - how big was the army of beggars? Were those who didn't ask asked for an opinion? Or don't give a damn about those who don't understand their happiness?
.
"And now we have a normal minute story - and that makes you happy" - you have and you are happy. But most people see it as unnecessary trash, rubbish, utterly useless ballast. Although, what's it to you, the unintelligent...
.
"By the way, it's not 10GB, but much less. Because of compression" - it's like a carrot...
.
Is that really all there is to it? Or is that just the most relevant argument? .....
That's not even remotely funny.
hehe :))
Hello! There's no need to be stupid. If you're a pauper who doesn't have 10GB of disk space, you don't give a shit about the "market". Also ask them to recompile the terminal to work for noSSE2 processors.
Hello! There's no need to be stupid. If you're a pauper who doesn't have 10GB of disk space, you don't give a shit about the "market". Also ask to recompile the terminal to work under noSSE2 processors.
Well, that's supposed to be the most compelling argument? Strong, and damn clever! :lol:
Young man, you can't even understand what you're talking about...
.
.
I see that the regulars here have a particularly revered "pauper" label :lol:
.
Of course, you put yourself in the "pauper" category :lol:
Or is there a more lofty appellation?
Don't write nonsense, no one will name you.
Why so much disregard for the problem? The question was originally where to read how the traffic pumping system works and how to predict the end of pointless pumping in the background of uncertain amounts of data. The question here is not about 10Gb, but whether we need them or not, although 10 is just for a general start, because even according to approximate calculations for 1 instrument, to view it since 1980 on monthly TF, you need almost 560Mb, not 2Mb as avtomat points out (because 2M bars are limited for showing, not Mb for downloading in minutiae). For example, a rough calculation of minutes = 60 per hour * per 24 hours per day * per 270 days per year * 30 years = 11664000 minute intervals. Now we should multiply it by record length in bytes (I think 6 fields with 8 bytes each), and total will be 559872000, i.e. 560Mb rounded off.
And you need this just to see the monthly chart? An entire CD for a single instrument, and over the Internet? If so, put me down as a pauper, I'm not ready for this madness either.