Websocket disconnecting

[daryl552007]

Hi Bmino,

as mentioned on the previous issue thread. I keep on getting disconnected then reconnecting again. You answered it could be an internet connection problem, is it mine if I run it once(npm start) instead of forever running the script? Or is it on my lightsail instance?

PS, I am running this on our lightsail instance by using SSH.

[daryl552007]

Hi Bmino,

I have already created a newer instance closer to Binance I assume after they suggested a region to connect the API from. However, I am still having this error. Though not as frequent as before. Is there a way for me to stop the script if this happens and then run it again automatically?

[bmino]

Hey, how long between starting the app until the disconnected/reconnected begins to occur? Is it consistently about the same amount of time?

[bmino]

If you want to restart the app when it crashes you can use something like pm2 or forever.

Be advised though that if the app is failing on startup this will continually restart (if used irresponsibly) your app exhausting your weighted API limits

[daryl552007]

Hi Bmino,

thanks for the tips. Yes I will watch out with exhausting the API limits.

for the time until I get disconnected, its usually around 10 -15 minutes I think, I am not sure if they get really reconnected as I just stopped the script and restart it again. The screen gets full with those Disconnected and reconnecting messages.

Also I am seeing this in the logs

[bmino]

No worries about the dots in your logs. Every time the program is restarted, that is printed to distinguish one execution from previous executions.

Every time I have encountered websockets disconnecting/reconnecting during execution, it has occurred due to an hiccup in internet connection. Other possibilities could include:

• Exceeding the 5 incoming messages per second websocket limit
• Maxing out cpu resources
• Timing out an inactive websocket connection at 24 hours

[daryl552007]

Thanks Bmino,

I am using lightsail, do you think that could be the reason? What other hosting do you suggest that have ran good latency for this scripts purpose?

[hathehuyen]

I have the same issue

[bmino]

I am unfamiliar with lightsail in particular. I've used simple aws ec2 instances, installed nodejs, and cloned the app, configured it, and then started the bot

[kimasplund]

This seems fairly good in general but it really needs a connection limiter. That would prevent the temporary banns from api connection.
Most other bots have it in config so you can set the ms limit

[wadalsahafa]

Hi Bmino
It will be great if you can add HITBTC as a supported exchange. I think it will work there. THanks

[dlasher]

I may open a separate ticket on this, but I've been running up against this limit often, and I've done a LOT of tweaking to try to work around this. Things I've tried:

1. More CPU - running it on a 32 core box
2. Less depth, depending on the SYMBOL, sometimes dropping to 10 depth isn't enough
3. Using VMHost near binance API - lower latency helps
4. Investment min/max/step - less steps helps a ton
5. TCP Stack tuning - helps a healthy amount

In theory, a 8 core dedicated VM, sitting in Singapore/Toyko, with <20ms response to api.binance.com, should be able to handle this without sockets timing out, assuming Binance is keeping up.. but it can't given what appears to be safe/common-sense config options.

I do wonder, from a socket standpoint, if the answer is less websockets open? One of the other arb-bots I've played with manages to do everything over a single WS, which at least avoids -this- problem.. (but it has other problems, lol)

As an aside, if it finds XX triangle relationships, why does it open max amount of websockets?

Found 625/882 currently trading tickers
Found 158 triangular relationships
Checking configuration ...
Checking balances ...
Opening 625 depth websockets ...```

[bmino]

I am investigating and working on a potential solution to this again

[bmino]

@dlasher in your example 158 triangular relationships are found, but let's say that only 1 relationship was found. We can call that relationship A -> B -> C. This requires AB, BC, and CA which would require three websockets to track those order books. This is why you see more web socket connections than triangular relationships

I'm about to put out a release which could address this issue but am still investigating some other potential causes

[dlasher]

@bmino - that makes sense, I think. experimented with reducing the whitelist down, and the number of sockets still seems more than 3x.

Found 641/906 currently trading tickers
Found 50 triangular relationships
Checking configuration ...
Checking balances ...
Opening 189 depth websockets ...

Assuming ZERO overlap, that's still 3.78x the number of relationships. In practice there should be a lot of overlap.

Trying this out visually:

• ETH-TRX-BTC-ETH - Track ETH-TRX, TRX-BTC and BTC-ETH
• ETH-ADA-BTC-ETH - Track ETH-ADA, ADA-BTC and BTC-ETH
• ETH-LINK-BTC-ETH - Track ETH-LINK, LINK-BTC and BTC-ETH

so for those (3) triangle relationships, I see 7 separate websockets.

Am I following the logic right?

In other words CA gets reused, and you're tracking lots of unique AB and BC? (2 more triangle, + 1 shared?) That should generate around 102 Websockets for 50 relationships?

[bmino]

Seems like a valid concern!
Will you please file a separate issue to track that?