Slashdot Mirror
London Stock Exchange Tackles System Problem
DMandPenfold writes "The London Stock Exchange has taken steps to resolve a system problem that occurred at 4.30pm Tuesday, which saw a delay to the start of the closing auction and knocked out automatic trades during a 42 second period. The problem occurred a day after the high profile launch of its new matching engine on the main equities market, based on the SUSE Linux system from Novell."
So, they replaced a C#/.NET infrastructure with C++/Linux and apparently didn’t test it? Now, I’m not the systems engineer involved with this, but I have a hard time believing that something like this didn’t come up in testing.
At least now they have the ultimate answer, now they just need to work on the ultimate question.
Why is this news? None of the several hour long outage calls I've been involved with were ever on the news.
This just shows that it's hard to build these highly available, low latency, massive usergroup systems. Previously there was a lot of chatter about the platforms (.NET, MSSQL 2003, etc...)
The problem is more likely to be internal organisation than specific platforms.
... should have stuck with Windows eh?"
I just know some Microsoft fanboys (they do exist, check out Neowin.net for examples) are gonna latch onto any and all problems that occur after the switchover, regardless of merit.
Imagine telling a trader in the 1970s that we had a 42 second outage in the stock market, it was all over the news, and a few companies probably lost hundreds of millions in revenue.
Liffe[sic] the universe and everything.
I've seen this too often in my 25+ professional years in IT. The system test manager produces an excellent plan, that fully simulates the anticipated workload. But it requires X testers, Y test case developers and Z machines. The program manager rejects the plan, "because he is under pressure to reduce costs." The program manager says, "The testing that the developers do should be enough." He then moves on, before the system goes into production.
The result? It always ends in tears.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Previously there was a lot of chatter about the platforms (.NET, MSSQL 2003, etc...)
It's one thing to have a 42 seconds glitch in the first day a totally new system is powered up. That's perfectly normal, and had been predicted:
"Observers watching today's Linux-based launch will likely note that such a large change could bring about some teething problems, as with any technology overhaul."
It's a totally different thing to have it stop for a whole day after having been in operation for three months.
So, in conclusion, yes, it's about the platform. .NET, MSSQL 2003, etc aren't robust enough for this kind of job.
Was the consequences of the loss of the automatic trade?
Everybody won? :D
-- sleep(life_the_universe_and_everything);
That being said, Linux is just a better platform to build something like this on. Sure, you can do it with Windows and make it work, but it's just more and unnecessarily difficult.
I keep hearing this, but never see any technical details. Why is this so?
I had extensive Windows programming experience before I switched to Linux about ten years ago and, basically, it boils down to the Unix philosophy.
Linux is a system made by programmers for programmers. Windows is a system made following directions of the marketing department.
42
4:30. What were the sys admins doing 10 minutes before this ? ;-)
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
Remember folks, you heard it here first:
APK says Windows is better than Linux.
That's NOT what London Stock Exchange reps said:
"LSE denied that the collapse was TradElect's fault" - http://blogs.computerworld.com/london_stock_exchange_to_abandon_failed_windows_platform by Stephen J. Vaughn-Nichols
Let's quote from your own link. First of all, the line you put between quotes was entirely out of context, because you omitted the initial "while" and the following lines:
"they also refused to explain what the problem really was. Sources at the LSE tell me to this day that the problem was with TradElect.
Since then, the CEO that brought TradElect to the LSE, Clara Furse, has left without saying why she was leaving. Sources in the City-London's equivalent of New York City's Wall Street--tell me that TradElect's failure was the final straw for her tenure. The new CEO, Xavier Rolet, is reported to have immediately decided to put an end to TradElect."
You also failed to mention that the article's title was "London Stock Exchange to abandon failed Windows platform" and that the author concluded:
"So, might I suggest to the LSE that they consider Linux as the foundation for their next stock software infrastructure? After all, besides working well for Chi-X, Linux seems to be doing quite nicely for the CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange), the NYSE (New York Stock Exchange), etc., etc."
"Sources at the LSE tell me to this day that the problem was with TradElect." - by mangu (126918) on Thursday February 17, @10:03AM (#35232010)
What 'sources' are those? The "horses' mouth" said otherwise:
(OR, can't you read?)
---
"You also failed to mention that the article's title was "London Stock Exchange to abandon failed Windows platform" and that the author concluded: "So, might I suggest to the LSE that they consider Linux as the foundation for their next stock software infrastructure? After all, besides working well for Chi-X, Linux seems to be doing quite nicely for the CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange), the NYSE (New York Stock Exchange), etc., etc." - by mangu (126918) on Thursday February 17, @10:03AM (#35232010)
LMAO - they abandoned a platform that ran SOLID for them for 2 yrs. time... and for what? A Linux one that has crashed 2x now in less than 1 yr.!
(Facts are FACTS, and today's article substantiates my statement above in reply to yours, easily!)
I have noted that Linux does the job elsewhere, just fine, myself -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1995760&cid=35212722 , so, you can't pull the "you're not being fair/complete" b.s. on me...
(I just tell it how it is, and I use backing documentation... like the above quote, for example, FROM THE HORSES' MOUTH LSE (not some "sources" who remained unnamed - that's NOT "good enough" for me!))
APK
P.S.=> Still, the fact remains - LINUX WENT "DOWN FOR THE COUNT" IN LESS THAN 1/2 a YEAR ON THE LSE! and, it's NOT THE FIRST TIME EITHER boys, so... "read 'em & weep" + "argue with the facts" I put out, not myself... apk
"Due to a technical problem, that system sent out the daily automatic message to clients - stating that the closing auction was beginning seconds late"
Cool story, Bro.
well there we have an answer to a popular question
High speed trading is just the froth on top of the market -- a million little bubbles.
Granted, it increases costs overall for everybody in the market, but those costs should be spread evenly. This shouldn't greatly adversely impact long term investors.
But it does still amount to an privileged class siphoning value out of the system. That's bad.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Y U MAD BRAH?
Don't worry, I'm on the case. Keep your hosts files updated, and your Windows recovery disk warm.
One trick pony only has one trick. :(
Oh APK, you are amazing.
tl;dr. Please try formulating a coherent point before posting.
thanks, now i'll be hitting in face anybody who wears those frackin sunglasses
Damn. You have uncovered my secret: I'm part of Linus Torvalds' secret Linux Astroturf Brigade.
You win twelve internets for your insight.
It's not an ad hominem attack, you fool. An ad hominem attack would take this form:
"APK is an unstable psychotic. We may therefore conclude that all of his points are invalid."
I am asking you to formulate a coherent point, rather than your rambling mess of capitals, emphatic text, and "PS" addenda, which is both physically painful to read, and logically incoherent.
An ad hominem attack is the logical fallacy of using negative statements about your opponent to discredit their arguments.
As I said, "APK is a psychotic. Therefore his points are wrong." Is an ad hominem attack. And it is a fallacy, because whether or not you are a psychotic isn't relevant to whether or not your argument holds water.
Calling you a 1-trick pony is an observation of your behavior: You flog the same snippets of text repeatedly with a rambling mish-mash of capital letters, bold typefaces, and other assorted walls of text. In other words - you make arguments that are incomprehensible to the reader, and only serve to undermine the strength of any point you try to make.
From your own link:
"An ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), also known as argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise."
In other words: If I were trying to dismiss your concerns by calling you a one trick pony, that would be an ad hominem argument.
Since I have simply observed that all you do is flog the same points with poor grammar and rambling and incoherent walls of text, that is not an ad hominem argument. It is simply observing the fact that that is all you do, and it doesn't matter whether your points are relevant or not, because you do such a horrible job of FORMULATING them that nobody can even tell what your point is. You're just cluttering up Slashdot with pointless self-promotion.
Name calling is, technically speaking, name calling: It is not a logical fallacy to call you a self-aggrandizing ass, it is simply an observation of your behavior, followed by me stating my opinion of it.
APK, why do you speak of yourself in the third person in these thinly veiled attempts at sock puppetry?
Noting that you're a self-aggrandizing bore is simply an observation. It is not an ad hominem attack, because frankly, I'm not arguing with any of your points, I'm simply pointing out that you love to repeat yourself!
Y U MAD, BRAH?
APK, I'll explain this to you one last time in small words with few syllables: for me to be conducting an "ad hominem" attack, I'd have to be saying something negative about you, *and then* suggesting that that negative trait is why your points are wrong and invalid. Name-calling and getting you all lathered with frustration like this is what we call "just a bit of fun," and has no bearing on whether or not your points are true, false, or completely disconnected from all reality.
You're the one who went off topic with your diatribe about SQL Server versions and "windows being better."
Fail harder though, seriously.
Yawn.
You're boring me, APK.
1) Learn what constitutes an ad hominem argument. The definition is very clear, and you haven't been subjected to one.
2) Attacking you? Hardly. I've simply called you some names and poked fun. If I were attacking you, you'd know it.
I see you're able to quote the definition I gave you - good for you! Next, perhaps you can work on understanding what all those big words mean.
If I were attacking you, you'd know it. And not even your precious hosts file would help you!
Testing can only prove the presence of bugs, not the absence.
It doesn't matter if you have 10,000 test cases or 10,000 times as many. Best case is you catch the bugs you were able to anticipate. And if you think you will be able to simulate real-life loads and traffic patterns of your first year in production, well, good luck with that.
If you are relying on testing to deliver "bug free" systems, you've already lost half the battle.
Do yourself a favor and dump most of your "test case" staff and hire yourself some real engineers. You'll find you didn't need those folks and have higher quality systems.
Performance must be inherent in every aspect of the system. It is not an afterthought, but always thought. - me
Frustrations mount over London Stock Exchange price data problems http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/it-business/3261625/frustrations-mount-over-london-stock-exchange-data-interface-problems/
You provided a link to the definition of ad hominem, which surprisingly, you appear incapable of comprehending.
I quoted the relevant definition of exactly what it was (not just a link). I win, you lose.
And why do you insist on asking if I'm making threats? I told you I wasn't, because if I was, you'd know it. Since you claim to not know whether or not I am, the answer, by process of deduction, is that I have not made any threats.
Really, APK. Elementary logic. You should read a book sometime.
APK, stop with the sock puppets. It does nothing to bolster your arguments, just makes you look like a foolish child, desperate for attention.
(And as far as hiding... who, exactly, is hiding behind an "Anonymous Coward" label here? Yeah... I thought so.)
APK, you seem intent on viewing every response of mine as a threat. Is it because you're a paranoid schizophrenic? Seek help.
We all know that you've got a hosts file and you're not afraid to use it!
But I'll do you a favor - my ip is 127.0.0.1 - please block me with your hosts file. Also, you probably want to block out a system named "localhost," that's sort of my thing, I use that identifier.
Again with the paranoid delusions.
You must live in such a scary world.
Don't need a PhD in psychiatry to diagnose you. Just good old-fashioned common sense, girlfriend.
APK == OFF TOPIC TROLL!
Prognosis is a term to describe a prediction of the "likely outcome of an illness." Diagnosis is a determination of what your illness is.
What I offered was a speculative diagnosis, based on my observations of your behavior here. My prognosis is that you will die alone, unloved, probably of liver failure because you'll turn to alcohol to fill that deep void in your life that Slashdot and your Hosts file can't fill.
See the difference?
APK == OFF TOPIC TROLL!
If a college degree is what gives you your mangled interpretations of "ad hominem," "prognosis," and other standard terms, I'm glad I'm not a graduate of whatever backwater troll factory you call your alma mater.
I do, in fact, have a college degree. You're wrong on all counts, but you are providing a remarkable demonstration of ad hominem attacks on me, and also, an effective case study in pissing into the wind. I'll let you know when I write you up in JAMA, the specifics of your case are fascinating.
APK == OFF TOPIC TROLL!
APK == OFF TOPIC TROLL.
I have no need to prove myself to you, you troll.
"We"? What, you got a mouse in your pocket now?
You don't know what an ad hominem argument is, you don't know what the difference between "diagnosis" and "prognosis" are, and you clearly have issues.
Cry more troll. Cry more.
Now you're just flapping your gums to hear yourself talk. Hope you enjoy it, you off-topic troll!
Wow, 2 posts that say the same thing, but which obviously aren't copies of one another. Are you having a psychotic break?
BOOOOOOORING.
Or it could be that I have nothing to prove to a raving lunatic whose sole source of excitement appears to be talking about how he edited a hosts file once.
Fail more, APK.
YAWN.
You finished?
I have nothing to prove to you. And why are you so insistent on me being a "fag" - hoping to score? Sorry to disappoint you, APK, but, psychotic and male isn't exactly my type.
No, I will not date you.
you just want my name so you can look me up and try to seduce me. No thanks, brah.
Sorry to disappoint, bro. Got a date, you'll have to amuse yourself for the rest of the night!