Some changes have just been added to the origin/next branch! [noreply] COMMON: Made version string parsing more robust

Some changes have just been added to the origin/next branch! [noreply] COMMON: Made version string parsing more robust

Some changes have just been added to the origin/next branch! [noreply] Removed gCachedMsg from mamaproducerc_v2 mama/c_cpp/src/testtools/performance/c/mamaproducerc_v2.c Results for OpenMAMA_RPM CI

Some changes have just been added to the origin/next branch! [noreply] Removed gCachedMsg from mamaproducerc_v2 mama/c_cpp/src/testtools/performance/c/mamaproducerc_v2.c Results for

Some changes have just been added to the origin/next branch! [noreply] Removed gCachedMsg from mamaproducerc_v2 mama/c_cpp/src/testtools/performance/c/mamaproducerc_v2.c Results for OpenMAMA Next

Thanks Dmitri – we’ll await your test case. FRANK QUINN Principal Engineer - EMEA Vela Trading Technologies O.+44 289 568 0209ext. 3592 fquinn@... Adelaide Exchange Building, 2nd

You trying to delete an order book entry I assume? What sort of undesired MAMDA behaviour? You have a backtrace if a crash results? I can’t see the rest of your book to assess if PL_SIZE=3112200 is

Hi Dmitri, Looks like an illegal message to me – it’s trying to add an entry to a price level with zero size. Cheers, Frank FRANK QUINN Principal Engineer - EMEA Vela Trading

Thanks Damian, Yes, referring to the data dictionary file made them working, my bad, I naively trusted to the "bookticker --help" output :-/. My focus is recap messages and how different order book

From a really (really) quick glance at the source, I don’t think the BookPublisher code is handling dictionary requests itself. You can probably get ‘bookticker’ to work by using the same

Hi all, I'm testing the QPID bridge with bookpublisher and bookticker, but it seems that the dialog between them is stuck at the data dictionary request. This is the command lines: > bookpublisher -v

Thank you Damian, I don't want to bring it up just based on the code analysis. Let's see if I'd be able to come up with a test case that demonstrates different behaviour that is triggered by this

Hi all, Is this a valid MAMDA delete message, please (non-relevant fields

Hi all, Is this a valid MAMDA update message, please (non-relevant fields

Hey Dmitri, There's probably someone who can clarify better, but I believe the difference is the 'mNumEntries' is the total number of entries which the data feed has reported is part of the book, but

Hi, I'm working on a performance issue with the Solace proprietary OpenMAMA bridge processing MAMDA messages and I've come across this: void MamdaOrderBookPriceLevel::setNumEntries (mama_u32_t

Look good for Solace. Regards, Dmitri Fedorov Software Architect Solace Ottawa, ON Canada Solace Corporation accepts no liability for the content of thisemail, or for the consequences of any actions

Hi Dmitri. Honestly you should have reviewed it by now. The RFC review period is supposed to be 2 weeks and it has been almost a month now so it remains closed. In saying that if you want to suggest

T ​hanks Frank, The two different recap messages are from the same subscription at different points in time. I've looked at updates coming it, they don't look like the recap messages at all. None of

Hi Frank, can I have one more week for that please? Regards, Dmitri Fedorov Software Architect Solace Ottawa, ON Canada Solace Corporation accepts no liability for the content of thisemail, or for the