Full or Incremental Refresh (265=0 or 1)

, ,
1

Imported from previous forum

2

[ original email was from N. D. - ndalal@tradeblade.com ]
Hi!

I was curious to know - what is used more commonly in the FX space for MD Updates. Is it 265=0 or 265=1? Do OMSs usually handle both scenarios or are coded for one or the other?

Cheers!

3

[ original email was from Jay Hurley - Jay.Hurley@morganstanley.com ]
> Hi!

I was curious to know - what is used more commonly in the FX space for
MD Updates. Is it 265=0 or 265=1? Do OMSs usually handle both scenarios
or are coded for one or the other?

Cheers!

265=0 is easier to support because the first message is always going to be a full refresh message and 265=0 or 265=1 is selecting whether subsequent messages will be full or incremental refreshes.

Selecting 265=1 and taking the incremental messages is recomended as it is going to be a lot more efficient even if it means extra work on the client side to maintain the book state.

4

[ original email was from N. D. - ndalal@tradeblade.com ]
> > Hi!

I was curious to know - what is used more commonly in the FX space for
MD Updates. Is it 265=0 or 265=1? Do OMSs usually handle both
scenarios or are coded for one or the other?

Cheers!

265=0 is easier to support because the first message is always going to
be a full refresh message and 265=0 or 265=1 is selecting whether
subsequent messages will be full or incremental refreshes.

Selecting 265=1 and taking the incremental messages is recomended as it
is going to be a lot more efficient even if it means extra work on the
client side to maintain the book state.

Thanks for the response. I do understand the efficiency advantage for 265=1. Wat is the mechanism used in Live applications? Do OMS applications for most part subscribe to ‘Incremental’ MD updates?