Any rookie question, so as not to clutter up the forum. Professionals, don't pass by. Nowhere without you - 6. - page 989

 
paladin80:

1) I was also very interested in this topic and made an experiment. I have a demo on MetaQuotes-Demo, using the script I wrote above, I found that the maximum number of orders (as I understand both open and pending, their amount) on this server = 200. I opened 200 positions manually, but when I tried to open 201 positions error message popped up: 2015.12.29 08:27:02.029 '7363947': order #0 sell 0.01 EURUSD at 1.09650 failed [Too many open orders].

2) 2 out of 200 open positions were closed. I created 2 pending orders and failed to open the 3rd one. Also failed to open a new position. I.e. 198 open positions + 2 pending orders = limit on any order type.

So I conclude that ACCOUNT_LIMIT_ORDERS shows the maximum number of all orders on the given server, including positions.

It is possible that Metaquotes has the same limit of pending orders and trades. But these are actually different parameters. ACCOUNT_LIMIT_ORDERS shows (in my experiments) the amount of pending orders. I set requests programmatically and did not try to reach the limit. I used the Alpari nano account as an example. Their trade limit is 100 trades. ACCOUNT_LIMIT_ORDERS - it shows 47. As I understand it, these are pending orders since we can open 100 trades (nano account specification). You can open 500 trades on a standard Alpari account. And with big money (I do not remember the quantity) there is no limit. But! on the number of trades, not orders, which is correct, because otherwise you can make a DDOS attack - overload the broker with orders - his server gets overwhelmed with 1 million orders to process.

By the way, the limit does not work in the strategy tester. That is why we have to try it either on the demo or on the real account.

 
Chiripaha:

It is possible that Metakvot has the same number of limit orders and trades. But in reality they are different parameters. ACCOUNT_LIMIT_ORDERS shows (in my experiments) the number of orders. I set requests programmatically and did not try to reach the limit. I used the Alpari nano account as an example. Their trade limit is 100 trades. ACCOUNT_LIMIT_ORDERS - it shows 47. As I understood it, these are exactly the pending orders since it is absolutely possible to open 100 trades (nano account specification). You can open 500 trades on a standard Alpari account. And with big money (I do not remember the quantity) there is no limit. But! on the number of trades, not orders, which is correct because otherwise we can make a DDOS attack - flood the broker with orders - his server will collapse with 1 million orders to process.

By the way, the limit does not work in the strategy tester. So we have to try it either on a demo or on a real account.

So, you have applied AccountInfoInteger(ACCOUNT_LIMIT_ORDERS) to your Alpari nano account and the result was 47, but you managed to open 100 positions there? If so, I'm stumped.
 
paladin80:
So, you have applied AccountInfoInteger(ACCOUNT_LIMIT_ORDERS) to the Alpari nano account and the result was 47, but you still managed to open 100 positions? If so, I'm stumped.

As a result, you led me to doubts - I rechecked it. I compiled the code incorrectly before. Now I corrected it (double-checked it) - it shows 100. Probably 47 is a serial number of ACCOUNT_LIMIT_ORDERS. Hence the error.

So... Let's assume that AccountInfoInteger(ACCOUNT_LIMIT_ORDERS) gives exactly the right parameter - namely, the limit of the amount of trades and pending orders.

Thank you very much for the discussion - this is the most probable solution. If not, the practice will show. I'll try it on different accounts later - I'm getting sleepy now.

So Metacquotes are incorrectly annotated in the official documentation... Radicals and such... : )) They're talking specifically about pending orders.

Thanks again Maxim!

PS

I've already made corrected queries on different accounts - I can't give a categorical answer, because where there are no limits officially, and where there should be, it gives out "0" - i.e. no limits. Only the nano demo account showed a limit of 100.

That's what I don't like about forex - it's murky, just like Metacquotes.

Yep... I don't know how to rate it: the demo nano account showed 100; and the real nano account showed 0 (would also be 100). All other accounts showed zero too: standard in Alpari (e.g. account specification - 500, I looked at two real accounts) and in NPB (but in NPB there are no limits and never have been, the account is real).

What I bought, I sell for. How to evaluate the results I do not know yet. It is not obvious and unclear to me. If there are no limits, I will only be glad. But I suspect that these limits may be set virtually (not by the terminal server). Therefore, the request by standard terminal functions will give one figure, while the real conditions are completely different, to make it easier to withdraw.

Unfortunately, I have no desire to check the set of deals on a real account, because in my robot (currently being tested) I, on the contrary, avoid reaching the limit, otherwise it will be lost. That is why I will not be able to check it on my real account (hopefully if everything goes well). And the demo is a weak indicator. : )

Here's the account specification at Alpari http://www.alpari.ru/ru/trading/trading_terms/it says what should be in front of the"Stop Out" parameter.This is as an example. For others, I think it will be similar.

Although we have figured it out, we cannot use AccountInfoInteger(ACCOUNT_LIMIT_ORDERS), alas. That's why we will have to make a crutch manually. : ))

 
Chiripaha:
...

PS

I have already made corrected queries on various accounts - I cannot give a categorical answer, because both where there are no limits officially, and where there should be, gives a "0" - i.e. no limits. Only the nano demo account showed a limit of 100.

...

Yeah... I don't know how to rate: the demo nano account showed 100; and the real nano account showed 0 (would also be 100). All other accounts showed zero too: standard in Alpari (e.g. account specification - 500, looked at two real accounts) and in NPB (but in NPB there are no limits and never have been, the account is real).

...

I strongly recommend to contact Alpari support saying you should use this script (write the full code) to check the order limit and on such and such a server you get 0 and whether this means that there is no limit. You can write about all the results on those servers where you have checked with them.

You can see from their specification that the limit for nano.mt4 should be 100 for both demo and real, but you got 100 and 0. You should definitely check with your broker. Write that there is a discrepancy between what you see in the specification and what the script itself found.
 

In all seriousness - Thanks for the advice, Maxim.

I have been in the market for a long time and have been doing a lot of testing for a long time. I have contacted many times not only Alpari personally by phone - the answer is very simple: "Yes, it shows zero, but that doesn't "mean" anything - the conditions are as described in the specification." - All margin forex is betting, so the story is very simple: either they take our money or they give theirs away. Would they impose all these conditions which no normal broker would even in their twisted fantasies think of, as they would limit their, the broker's, interests. All the conditions are improved every year just to prevent us from writing systems that are able to take into account different factors, because it may lead to our earnings - their losses: but why do they need it? It's all very obvious here. On the subject of Metacvots - either they are, delicately put, imperfect and make professional mistakes, or there is a conscious play on the side of the DCs, as they are the source of income, the ones who feed the developer.

In fact - this is not the worst thing. On the contrary, it's even a good thing. The worst thing is when you have the same conditions, and as soon as you start earning, they instantly change the conditions while trading. For example (from the last one - on real account) during statistics (US FRS made rate decision) our brokerage company stopped closing profitable positions - requotes, requotes, requotes... Although the market reaction was very calm and there was almost no movement, i.e. the price did not run away - it was in the same place for minutes. After about 30 minutes everything was working properly. - This is a particular case of any (!) brokerage company on real accounts. I have a demo of the same brokerage companies and everything closes fine with huge profits. I should just keep in mind this and take it into account in trading strategies. - I have been married for many years. : ))

Moreover, the support itself is not aware - they do not solve these issues, they are just ordinary executors. So I "understand" them. Of course, they employ "dumb" people, but it doesn't change the matter - even if they were competent professionals - it's not their level of expertise, they just need to make money. Those who solve these issues - they are well aware of what they are doing and why. It is like communicating with a murderer and trying to change his mind that it is not good to kill, etc. When they feel money in hundreds of thousands of dollars a month - they are ready to strangle you (us) with their bare hands on the spot. When you reasonably prove to them (as you, Maxim, advised me) they revel in their self-righteousness and say in your (me) eyes - Yes, we are .... And we are kind and fluffy and it's all for your sake. Exactly like the Americans, the Europeans (bourgeois) towards Russia (not about politics, but about methods). Exactly what K. Marx wrote about - "they would sell their mother for 300% of the profit".

 
Chiripaha:

In all seriousness - Thanks for the advice, Maxim.

I have been in the market for a long time and have been doing a lot of testing for a long time. I have contacted many times not only Alpari personally by phone - the answer is very simple: "Yes, it shows zero, but that doesn't "mean" anything - the conditions are as described in the specification." - All margin forex is betting, so the story is very simple: either they take our money or they give theirs away. Would they impose all these conditions which no normal broker would even in their twisted fantasies think of, as they would limit their, the broker's, interests. All the conditions are improved every year just to prevent us from writing systems that are able to take into account different factors, because it may lead to our earnings - their losses: but why do they need it? It's all very obvious here. On the subject of Metacvots - either they are, delicately put, imperfect and make professional mistakes, or there is a conscious play on the side of the DC as they are the source of income, the ones who feed the developer.

In fact - this is not the worst thing. On the contrary, it's even a good thing. The worst thing is when you have the same conditions, and as soon as you start earning, they will instantly change the conditions while trading. For example (from the last one - real account) during statistics (US FRS rate decision) broker stopped closing profitable positions - requotes, requotes, requotes... Although the market reaction was very calm and there was almost no movement, i.e. the price did not run away - it was in the same place for minutes. After about 30 minutes everything was working properly. - This is a particular case of any (!) brokerage company on real accounts. I have a demo of the same brokerage companies and everything closes fine with huge profits. I should just keep in mind this and take it into account in trading strategies. - I have been married for many years. : ))

Moreover, the support itself is not aware - they do not solve these issues, they are just ordinary executors. So I "understand" them. Of course, they employ "dumb" people, but it doesn't change the matter - even if they were competent professionals - it's not their level of expertise, they just need to make money. Those who solve these issues - they are well aware of what they are doing and why. It is like communicating with a murderer and trying to change his mind that it is not good to kill, etc. When they feel money in hundreds of thousands of dollars a month - they are ready to strangle you (us) with their bare hands on the spot. When you argue their case (as you, Maxim, advised me) they revel in their self-righteousness and say in your (me) eyes - Yes, we are .... And we are kind and fluffy and it's all for your sake. Exactly as the Americans, the Europeans (bourgeois) towards Russia (not about politics, but about methods). Exactly what K. Marx wrote about - "they would sell their mother for 300% of the profit".

I've had it happen there more than once, even the stop-losses do not close in plus and minus, if it increases in minus. I'm done for now. Nothing to feed the sharks! Complete lawlessness! A normal business should operate on customers' income, not on their losses! Any sweepstakes is fairer!
 
borilunad:
I've had it happen there more than once too, even on a stop loss not closing in plus and minus if it increases in minus. I'm done for now. Nothing to feed the sharks! Total chaos! A normal business should operate on customers' income, not on their losses! Any sweepstakes is fairer!

: ))))))

I too 'quit' a year ago. Now new thoughts have come up - I'm back.

But, on the whole, I completely agree with you.

By the way, at Alpari and Stop-Level is also zero - if you ask for constants. This is exactly the topic I was talking to them about 2 years ago and they told me to be guided by the spec. But they don't cheat and say they have it floating. Others say they don't have a Stop-Level at all, but it actually shows up in the trade. Etc... is popcorn (topic) - you can chew it for a long time.

 
Chiripaha:

: ))))))

I too 'quit' a year ago. Now new thoughts have come up - I'm back.

But, on the whole, I completely agree with you.

By the way, Alpari and Stop-Level is also zero - if you ask for constants. This was the topic I was talking to them about 2 years ago and they told me to be guided by the specification. But they don't cheat and say they have it floating. Others say they don't have a Stop-Level at all, but it actually shows up in the trade. Etc... is popcorn (topic) - you can chew it for a long time.

That's why only on the Demo for now. Maybe something will change, but unlikely! But I continue, how much time I've wasted on this black hole! But it's still interesting, until I meet a new hobby. Though I still hope that maybe the "business" based on deceit will collapse and they'll start building according to justice. The degradation of mankind has gone so far! :(((
 
borilunad:
That's why for now only on Demke now. Maybe something will change, but unlikely! But I continue, how much time wasted on this black hole! But it's still interesting, until I meet a new hobby. Though I still hope that maybe the "business" based on deceit will collapse and they'll start building according to justice. The degradation of mankind has gone so far! :(((

It is your naïve hope for nothing. For example, 25 years have passed since the collapse of the USSR, but in a quarter of a century the state has not even thought of establishing an official open currency exchange. I do not count bank currency exchanges - they are a robbery to enrich bank owners. There is no law, no mechanism, and no desire on the part of the government to do this because then it would be very hard to keep the ruble in the payment system. But those who benefit from it can always exchange on normal delivery terms. This is why DCs are flourishing, because the state legislation sets up the conditions so that this is the only way to engage in currency exchange. It seems that the law on the new rules of currency exchange came into force today... - This is the answer to your hopes. As long as there are no normal conditions for currency exchange, there will be underground casinos. There is no point in being offended. You just need to understand the objective economic benefits of capitalists and the patterns over the last 300-500 years. (Feudalism and slavery we will leave out).

The right thing to do would be to apply what you have learned to the stock market. This must be a deliverable, i.e. you must receive the goods for your money: currency, stocks, oil, etc.. But!...it is more profitable to work out the mechanisms on similar game systems like marginal forex. If your system is survivable here, you can move to exchange trading with already worked out technologies. So - there is no silver lining. It's just that even in shit you need to see manure to fertilise and get high yields.

 
Chiripaha:

It is your naïve hope for nothing. For example, 25 years have passed since the collapse of the USSR, but in a quarter of a century the state has not even thought of establishing an official open currency exchange. I do not count bank currency exchanges - they are a robbery to enrich bank owners. There is no law, no mechanism, and no desire on the part of the government to do this because then it would be very hard to keep the ruble in the payment system. But those who benefit from it can always exchange on normal delivery terms. This is why DCs are flourishing, because the state legislation sets up the conditions so that this is the only way to engage in currency exchange. It seems that the law on the new rules of currency exchange came into force today... - This is the answer to your hopes. As long as there are no normal conditions for currency exchange, there will be underground casinos. There is no point in being offended. You just need to understand the objective economic benefits of capitalists and the patterns over the last 300-500 years. (We'll leave feudalism and slavery out of it)

The right thing to do is to apply what you have learned to the stock market. This must be a derivative product, which means that you must receive the goods for your money: currency, stocks, oil, etc... But!...it is more profitable to work out the mechanisms on similar game systems like marginal forex. If your system is survivable here, you can move to exchange trading with already worked out technologies. So - there is no silver lining. It's just that even in shit you need to see manure to fertilise and get high yields.

Yes I agree with you! But Russian affairs haven't bothered me for a long time, only still cause me indignation. But here, in Europe, I thought it was better with forex! I am in GKFX in Madrid and I got a quote from MQ and they have no M1 in the history! I also get the best quotes from them. I called them and asked what they do without M1 and I got the answer: who needs 1-minute quotes but they just slow me down and waste memory! I have not explained that I should use 1-minute lines in any case for the tester, to test M1 bars at the opening, even if I set it in the demo for other TFs. I have nothing to do there. That is why I have tried the Alps for now.

Globalization has completely broken the achievement of feudalism, agriculture, so that natural products are now a rarity and a luxury. Monopolies in all spheres impoverish the general population, almost leading to a state of slavery, but it's true that they don't kill on a whim. The recent elections have shown that one can still naively or convincingly hope that improvement is possible! As they say, time will tell! Good night!

Reason: