开云体育

Yes, that's right. I'm guessing you didn't change what you thought you changed. Here's a step by step if you want to try again: * install the system package via ```sudo apt install

Thank you all for your help and information. I tried the mods to compilation, packages, makefiles mentioned without any change in the outcome. In fact it looks like the library is not a shared

wrote: BTW, I also just tried w/ 981 and the bracket went through. Which makes me think that you might try updating the API version you're using (not just TWS/IBGW). I'm sure you're aware that the

Thanks, Jürgen. The API and gateway logs don't show any data or errors (although we had some gateway logs from the day it worked). We're raising a ticket with IBKR. My best hypothesis at the moment

my bet is that it's something internal to IB.? How about just setting up a reset loop with a count. So if you hit an error like this one log it, and retry the connection n times. If you blow the n

Hello everyone, Upon launching my trading app right before the market opened, the connection was established without any issues. However, after a few hours (during active market hours), while our app

I couldn't get your new version to work until I moved the ```reader_thread.start()``` call to after the ```self.connect("127.0.0.1", self.port, self.client_id)``` call; like Jürgen's version. But

Of course. Thanks Jürgen and buddy. I had been trying to establish the reader thread after connecting (not shown in the previous code I posted) rather than prior – an approach which worked in

There we have it, Dave. Let me see whether I can put the pieces together for you: * The typical TWS API Python client is a two-thread solution. * EReader runs in its own thread, reads TWS/IBGW

Sorry, this should be between the client and _reader_. But, the set and wait are called from the same thread of Dave's example and so all that's accomplished is deadlock.

If you mean between the client and wrapper then I'd say yes.

Hard to say since I think it depends on the overall context and mostly on what the program is meant to accomplish. For example, is it meant to be long lived or just do some processing and exit? What

Would Event objects provided bz the asyncio package work better here (IBKR suggests asyncio and ib_insync is built upon it) ? The goal, as I understand it, is to fully comply with the IBKR TWS API

That's already happening via the base classes. Unfortunately, by calling [wait](https://docs.python.org/3/library/threading.html#threading.Event.wait) the main thread itself (which should receive the

Unfortunately I am not Python literate enough to give you concrete help, Dave. But on the surface, your approach looks fine. I am wondering, though, whether there is some adverse interaction between

Along your questions, I'd make sure that TWS/IBGW does indeed receive the requests and check what, if anything, is returned. So enable API logging in TWS/IBGW, run your program, decrypt the the API

Hi Jürgen (and others), Thanks for your comments on this, as helpful as always.? I'm experiencing a similar absence of the IBApi.EWrapper.nextValidId (

I couldn't get the java client working (which is my problem, obviously), but I did manage to get a python client using ibsync up and running. As far as I can see, it behaves in exactly the same

Sorry... this should read different _compilers_, not binutils.

Btw, searching around revealed [another case](https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/26640#issuecomment-1455024923) where the same failed binutils assertion yielded a dangerous relocation and