Snapshot for orderbook updates about python-bittrex-websocket HOT 8 CLOSED

Hi @cmollen and welcome!
Subscribe_to_orderbook_update() gives you only nounces and Its intended to do so. It’s used in the case when users have their own syncing mechanism, I.e through api request.

With regards to your last paragraph, this only applies when you subscribe to market updates, if you subscribe to the order book or executed trades, then the specific ticker is invoked.
I’m on the phone so I hope this is as clear as possible.

from python-bittrex-websocket.

Thanks for the quick reply, all clear! I would assume that my use case is more common (wanting to capture and store the orderbook for future recreation, without wasting space on levels that haven't changed), but the change was minimal so I will just keep my own branch then.

from python-bittrex-websocket.

If you want to keep a live orderbook you should use subscribe_to_orderbook. With respect to the wasting space on levels, I don’t completely understand what you mean :).

from python-bittrex-websocket.

:) I don't want to keep a live orderbook, I want to store the orderbook to disk and be able to recreate it at a later time for analysis and backtesting. If I store every update passed to the on_orderbook() callback to disk, I will be wasting disk space as it passes all levels of the orderbook, and not just the levels that have been updated. So if I subscribe to 50 levels and only one is updated, I still need to save 50 levels, or check every single update to see which levels have changed.

from python-bittrex-websocket.

With subscribe_to_orderbook_update you will only get the nounces, this is exactly what you need.

from python-bittrex-websocket.

As stated in the first post, the only thing lacking with subscribe_to_orderbook_update is that it doesn't have the option to return the full state in the first update. Otherwise, it is impossible to recreate the full orderbook state. And seeing as the snapshot sync is already implemented for SUB_TYPE_ORDERBOOK, it seems like a waste to re-implement it on the outside.

from python-bittrex-websocket.

I agree that the option of requesting a full order book snapshot to be implemented, but don’t agree that it should be part of the update method. Although in your case it applies, it should be made general. I could implement it as a new method.

from python-bittrex-websocket.

That would be much appreciated. If you want to keep the number of callback methods down, one suggestion for making it more general would be to augment each level of the snapshot with a Type: 0 on the first call to on_orderbook_update. Then the format and the semantics would be the same for the snapshot and the subsequent updates.

from python-bittrex-websocket.