Non-simultaneous clients with ID numbers different from the first don't receive price ticks for a given stock after requesting them. Exact details are documented here (). Can anyone reproduce this? Or, is anyone suffering from it?
I have multiple accounts under a family office configuration, but only the advisor account has live data and can place trades. I suspect a lot of people here only have one account or use a configuration similar to what I use. You might want to try posting this here: https://groups.io/g/twsapi
You should still be able to try the example, if you're interested, since it doesn't need live data; it uses delayed frozen data. Even a trial account could be used. Still, I didn't know about that group and I'll ask over there too. Thanks.
It's not just you. There's something very strange going on and I'm not sure it's related to the API version. I've been using 10.x for months and issues started popping up yesterday for me with reqTickByTickData requests being ignored for ABNB.
Lol. What's frustrating in my case is that the problem isn't intermittent, it's easily reproducible. And, typically with software bugs, once you can reliably reproduce them with a test case they're somewhat easily fixed. So it's too bad I don't have access to the TWS java code that way I can just go in there, fix it myself, and submit a pull request. Btw, did you try the example? Or are you just expressing your sympathies?
Interesting, thanks. Out of curiosity are you using Windows, Mac, or Linux? I've seen it on both Linux and Windows 10 Home. I suspect it happens on all platforms and it's one of those tricky race condition type of bugs affecting their 10.x branches of TWS/IBG. Anyway... I've also experienced situations when this issue happens only intermittently. Last night in fact, when I was testing against a trial account, it happened only once. But against my live account it was happening every time. When I looked at the log files the only difference I could see was that my live account contained messages regarding an "empty/incorrect bbo exchange map". The trial account only had "bbo exchange is not available" message entries. It wouldn't really even bother me except part of my workflow uses multiple short-lived clients running in parallel. So, I'm sticking with 9.x until this is resolved. They should fix this... eventually?! My concern, of course, is that I've seen big companies unable to solve these kinds of issues for *years* (if ever) due to bureaucratic bumbling and lack of adequate expertise Well, I guess that's what workarounds and competitors are for! Lol
Ha, yeah... my optimism waxes and wanes. I'll admit the issue probably doesn't affect very many people. That said, it's rather clearly identified, can actually be resolved in somewhat short order by a capable developer with access to the code, and finally... some people actually do take pride in their work. It's almost a question of faith in craftsmanship. They'll either fix it and keep/acquire a sterling reputation or they're let it go and forever be known as slovenly hacks who are just about collecting commissions. It's not my reputation on the line, so what do I care? I must've woke up on the right side of the bed today because I suspect they'll want to fix it. IDK Have you seen the movie "Bridge on the River Kwai"? Lol: We'll show them what the British soldier is capable of doing...It's going to be a proper bridge. Now here again, I know the men. It's essential that they should take a pride in their job.