|
Mushoz (OP)
|
 |
March 12, 2013, 02:25:45 PM |
|
Mtgox trading engine lag: 3223.98s
What the hell is going on?
|
www.bitbuy.nl - Koop eenvoudig, snel en goedkoop bitcoins bij Bitbuy!
|
|
|
Bit_Happy
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 2114
Merit: 1040
A Great Time to Start Something!
|
|
March 12, 2013, 02:26:26 PM |
|
Anyone know?
|
|
|
|
|
Mushoz (OP)
|
|
March 12, 2013, 02:41:48 PM |
|
Trading has been resumed. No idea what happened. Bitcointalk was hard to reach as well during that time.
|
www.bitbuy.nl - Koop eenvoudig, snel en goedkoop bitcoins bij Bitbuy!
|
|
|
Piper67
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1001
|
|
March 12, 2013, 02:56:08 PM |
|
Anyone know?
MtGox realises that instability makes them a lot of money, so just as things are becoming stable again, they throw this monkey's wrench into the works. Shame on them. With the amounts they've been making lately, there is simply no excuse for this. |
|
|
|
|
Elwar
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3598
Merit: 2386
Viva Ut Vivas
|
|
March 12, 2013, 05:04:30 PM |
|
According to http://www.thewhir.com/web-hosting-news/bitcoin-value-drops-23-percent-after-software-glitch-discoveredBitcoin transactions were temporarily suspended on Monday night after a technical glitch with Bitcoin mining software, according to a report by Ars Technica.
After the glitch, the value of Bitcoins plummeted by 23 percent, dropping from $48 to $37, but the price soon recovered to $44, according to the report.
Major Bitcoin exchange Mt.Gox resumed Bitcoin deposits at 5:30 am EST Tuesday. So MtGox is going to suspend trading when bad things happen? |
First seastead company actually selling sea homes: Ocean Builders https://ocean.builders Of course we accept bitcoin. |
|
|
|
labestiol
|
|
March 12, 2013, 05:11:50 PM |
|
Only deposits (and maybe withdraws, not sure) were suspended last night, because of the increased risk of double spend.
As for this afternoon, hopefully it was for upgrading servers (yeah, maybe wishful thinking).
But saying Gox suspended trading to profit is bad conspiracy theory at best...
|
1BestioLC7YBVh8Q5LfH6RYURD6MrpP8y6
|
|
|
|
AndyRossy
|
|
March 12, 2013, 06:03:21 PM |
|
Stopping deposits, stops people depositing their bitcoins to sell / cause crash. All the exchanges closed deposits.
|
|
|
|
|
phungus
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 128
Merit: 100
I'm doin' fine on cloud 9
|
|
March 12, 2013, 06:12:17 PM |
|
The only way to fix this is to get their rinky-dink trading platform off of PHP and on to a lower-level language and libraries.
And maybe even on a new platform...
-p
|
I can do stuff
|
|
|
Melbustus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1004
|
|
March 12, 2013, 06:24:29 PM |
|
The only way to fix this is to get their rinky-dink trading platform off of PHP and on to a lower-level language and libraries.
And maybe even on a new platform...
-p
Yeah, Facebook should get off of PHP too before they have to handle any real volume.  Language choice is 2nd order. |
Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
|
|
|
phungus
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 128
Merit: 100
I'm doin' fine on cloud 9
|
|
March 12, 2013, 06:51:19 PM |
|
Facebook is able to scale horizontally because of the way web services work.
MtGox has to run the trading engine all on one server. Did you see that they released the specs of the two machines they're using?
Facebook literally has many tens of thousands of servers. Gox has like 2 and only one of them can be the actual trading engine.
Language and library speed is the top priority in this context.
-p
|
I can do stuff
|
|
|
avoid3d
Member
Offline
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
|
|
March 12, 2013, 08:08:03 PM |
|
Why is trading limited to vertical scaling ?
|
avoid3d - Pierre Hugo
1avoid9FDvP15aKNyPGgJPcxfzMFM4Af6
|
|
|
|
epetroel
|
|
March 12, 2013, 08:53:52 PM |
|
Why is trading limited to vertical scaling ?
Because orders need to be processed in exactly the order they are received. This is inherently a "single-threaded" process that can't really be parallelized very efficiently. That said, they seem to have two monster servers that do the work of the trading engine, website, database & api. I would imagine that work could be split up more efficiently by having a separate machine dedicated to the trading engine, other machines serving the web front end, another for the database server, etc. They may be doing something like that internally with VMs already though. |
|
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
March 12, 2013, 08:56:20 PM |
|
MtGox has to run the trading engine all on one server. In related news the entire NASDAQ must run on a single server because it is impossible for trading engines to span multiple servers. |
|
|
|
|
bpd
Member
Offline
Activity: 114
Merit: 10
|
|
March 12, 2013, 09:02:04 PM |
|
MtGox has to run the trading engine all on one server. In related news the entire NASDAQ must run on a single server because it is impossible for trading engines to span multiple servers. Well, not quite true. They split up ticker symbols across multiple servers by alphabetical ranges. But your point stands, that the NASDAQ engines probably each handle about 100-1000x more order flow as MtGox does. Whoever wrote Gox's software deserves to lose their CS degree, if they ever had one. |
|
|
|
|
|
epetroel
|
|
March 12, 2013, 09:04:41 PM |
|
MtGox has to run the trading engine all on one server. In related news the entire NASDAQ must run on a single server because it is impossible for trading engines to span multiple servers. NASDAQ trades many different securities. Each of them could theoretically be traded on it's own server. Also, if I understand things correctly, you don't trade directly with NASDAQ. You trade with a broker who first tries to match your order against their own order book, then goes to other brokers to match your order against their books. So there's no real guarantee that you'll always get the best possible price or that orders are necessarily executed in the sequence they are received. |
|
|
|
|
elux
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1458
Merit: 1006
|
|
March 12, 2013, 09:09:14 PM |
|
 ?? ?? ?? No statement or explanation of the issue from Mt.Gox? |
|
|
|
|
|
shkiser
|
|
March 12, 2013, 09:14:31 PM |
|
The more time that goes by, and the longer Im involved with btc, the more the btc seems to not be "so decentralized", and the more I believe the price is being manipulated.. Who knows anymore..
|
|
|
|
|
donjoe
|
|
March 12, 2013, 09:26:40 PM |
|
Yet most of you insist on staying on Gox and on perpetuating its role as a single point of failure.
Imagine one day the government gets pissed at Bitcoin and decides to shut down Gox. Millions of BTC evaporated in an instant.
|
|
|
|
byronbb
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1000
HODL OR DIE
|
|
March 12, 2013, 09:59:24 PM |
|
Yet most of you insist on staying on Gox and on perpetuating its role as a single point of failure.
Imagine one day the government gets pissed at Bitcoin and decides to shut down Gox. Millions of BTC evaporated in an instant.
RALLY! |
|
|
|
elux
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1458
Merit: 1006
|
|
March 13, 2013, 12:03:54 AM |
|
I thought we already had official confirmation that the trade stop was put in place as a preventive reaction to the 0.7 vs 0.8 buggy chain fork?
I think the severity of the issue and its potential developments were more than enough reason for stopping trades for an hour.
No. That was a separate, earlier issue, which was addressed by MtGox: Bitcoin deposits temporarily suspended. |
|
|
|
|
|
