SQ X updates

Here’s where we can discuss SQ X updates nad news.

This topic was renamed from SQ4 Early preview. The old, no longer relevant posts are or will be deleted and archived.

The point is in clearing up our forum from old, non-relevant stuff.

Have you limited the memory correctly in the Configuration -> Memory? Try to use the “Set maximum memory to” option instead of the new default “Let program determine maximum memory”, and set it to currently free RAM minus ~2GB for safety. Then it should never exceed that limit.

Yes in both of them, if I let program find it it used to freeze and stop project, my max memory is 32gb but I set it to 27 and in the past it rarely hit 14 gb and new version same config is at 20 gb after 40 minutes

You say that you´ve assigned it 27GB and that your usage after 40 minutes is at 20GB – that would be within the limit of the 27GB and should not be a problem. If you can´t SQX let use more than 20GB, you´ll need to set your limit to 20GB, not 27GB, as it otherwise, of course, will try to use the 27GB that you´ve allowed. That previous versions didn´t use > 14 GB, is not a bug, but an inefficiency of the previous version. The more RAM SQX uses, the less garbage collection it has to do. So if you are unhappy with it using >20GB, just set your limit to 20GB instead of 27GB, or whatever you REALLY can assign to it.

I beg to differ, my computer has still free memory even if allocate 27 gb for sq, and if I allocate less it will just crash earlier. I tried the option of forcing the use of garbage collector every 10 minutes and after that every minute but none of them worked, the memory keeps increasing until it crashes. Anyways thanks for trying to help and  your very quick responses

Ah, it crashes once reaching the limit, OK, I understand. Hmm, have you tried with the saving databanks on disk option? Does it make a differences with the RAM fill-up?

Gonna try that now, I have been taking the images of the comparison between version 113 and version 116 for the bug report, i’ll report the results of saving databanks on disk option soon.

I have same problem, running out of memory!

In 115 it was running ok, same settings now and runs out of memory!

Parallel GC is enabled and it runs on Java that is supplied with SQX,

Did not try Java 12 yet!

Odd, well, surely a bug then, just strange that I´ve been running it fine for 24+ hours here already without any memory issues. But surely Mark can find out what is going on.

Hello, I have updated to the latest java version. The program now seems stable.

Merry X-mas guys,

I hope you all had (and have) a nice Christmas. Normally I don´t ask for votes on bugs, but I´ve just spent my Christmas night (ok, “only” 5 hours of it) on finally cracking down on the issue that SQX still creates so many unsymmetric strategies and make big bug report with a partial fix. Along with the pre-defined indicator ranges that were absolutely messy until a few releases ago and have (almost) been fixed after several investigations I´ve done, these are one of the most important but often overlooked issues SQX still has. This is because those are the BASE of any strategy generation and if those are not correct, we are all simply wasting CPU cycles, because SQX tries to generate strategies that make no sense at all. So it´s very important those are fixed 100% before anything else, because they are the like the main engine and everything else is based on those. Please take a moment and upvote so that this will be finally addressed and looked at with the needed accuracy (although I´ve already provided a partial fix in there too for now):

https://roadmap.strategyquant.com/tasks/sq4_3777

along with this one:

https://roadmap.strategyquant.com/tasks/sq4_3542

and this one:

https://roadmap.strategyquant.com/tasks/sq4_3539

Thank you 🙂

Sometimes i think some of you are paid to post positive contributions here 🙂

Therefore I would like to initiate here a hopefully constructive criticism debate at the current situation

I’m also a fan of SQ but I’d like to point out that I expect a software with this high value to work reliably. I also actively participate in debugging the beta versions but, if we are honest…that’s rather untypical that a company go (official) to the CUSTOMER and ask him to check the software paid by the CUSTOMER himself if it works and doesn’t even pay the CUSTOMER!

However, this would not be a problem if the following main problem were not present

I’m always looking for long-term strategies, i.e. strategies that have been successful for 15 years or more and even in the old version I didn’t find a strategy where the backtest in SQ was the same as the livetest in my broker. I’m not talking about 1 minute or 2 minutes deviations, I’m talking about several days deviations with completely different results….regularly!

I like to be open for hints what I’m doing wrong….but maybe you think about fixing such bugs first as introducing things like Timeframes M17 where not even the installation routine worked……..

Mark Fric wrote:

There are also some new features, such as flexible timeframes – you can create custom timeframe like M17.

Hey Mark, does this make it easier for implementing renkos with tick data precision? Any chance this can come to build 118 if so?

https://roadmap.strategyquant.com/tasks/sq4_0991

Same here, on a  trial version …

Now running a fresh install, it seems we can transfer historical data by copying :

<SQFolder>\user\data\data.db and Hystory folder

from ancient install to new install.

I’d also like to ask, if it’s not much of a problem, not to reset the software’s settings every time an update is performed.. including benchmark, configuration, and builder/retester settings.

I do have some of my favorite settings saved, but I change and play with them quite often and I see no reason why an update would reset the whole program..

Thanks,

Ilya

I agree with you guys, it´s pretty frustrating that there are still SO many bugs, even at basic tasks. I am trying to setup SQX for “serious business” since a while now, just to stumble upon really frustrating bugs in basic components (like that the Optimizer only does 7500 steps, regardless of what you set). And instead of finally being able to set it up for real trading, one ends up posting 10 new bugs in the backend, then spending another 2 weeks waiting on a new release that possibly fixes it, just to notice that this new release again has 10 new/remaining bugs that gonna report, and then…. LOOP 🙂

I think the SQ team should really ONLY focus on fixing bugs for the next months before introducing ANY new features. This needs to get some stability finally, it´s again rather frustrating right now.

All of you come well into 2019 and stay healthy 🙂