Without going into the finer points of 'Instruction-level parallelism' or doing some quite heavy benchtesting; which of the following two scenarios performs better (ie, smoother/faster), practicality aside and assuming unlimited memory space.
One instance of BA performing multiple tasks (ladder, automation, data collection/Excel instructions, charting, watch lists) or one instance of BA for each distinct task?
Instinct points me towards the latter but I'm not familiar with modern compilers so I have my doubts.
One or multiple BA instances
-
ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Anyone?
I thought I'd just give this one bump.
I thought I'd just give this one bump.
-
ruthlessimon
- Posts: 2094
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:54 pm
From personal experience (using two Macs), I lagged less when I used two instances vs. one instance connected via thunderbolt. but it depends on your setup - 1 powerful pc with 4 screens, I'd imagine 1 instance would be fine.
-
ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
That's RS.ruthlessimon wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:07 pmFrom personal experience (using two Macs), I lagged less when I used two instances vs. one instance connected via thunderbolt. but it depends on your setup - 1 powerful pc with 4 screens, I'd imagine 1 instance would be fine.
The way things are going, I'm having to run multiple instances anyway because I'm collecting data from a number of different markets at the same time. These sessions don't do much so I'm giving each one something extra to do, leaving my manual instance of BA nice and light and free running.
I know it all comes down to meaningless nano seconds, but just because you can't see it it's no reason not to do it properly
OCD, moi?Now I think about it I probably didn't need to bump this because these other factors have taken things in their own direction.