News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by supahfly_remix on Sunday September 30, 2018 @12:04PM (#18106712)
How does Jane St. use FPGAs to make money trading? My impression was that unless the application demands real speed (i.e., microseconds), write it as software that run in a general purpose processor, not in an FPGA. x86s always get the latest semiconductor processes, while FPGAs always lag.
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by logicchains on Sunday September 30, 2018 @12:12PM (#18106754)
High-frequency trading in a developed market demands response times on the order of nanoseconds, whereas anything in software is unlikely to get under a microsecond. If you're too slow, all the obvious efficiencies in the market have already been corrected by faster firms, so you miss out on a bunch of easy trades.
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by supahfly_remix on Sunday September 30, 2018 @12:21PM (#18106793)
Where does this nanosecond number come from for HFT? 1 ns is the time light takes to travel 30 cm in a vacuum. Are these firms only trading with firms that are a few meters away? How about round trip times? I believe only 10s of microseconds are significant, not nanoseconds.
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by jonnii on Sunday September 30, 2018 @12:29PM (#18106835)
That is exactly what is happening in high frequency trading. Firms are paying crazy money to be colocated in the same data centers as the exchanges.
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by akatechis on Sunday September 30, 2018 @06:20PM (#18108747)
Exactly. At an investment bank for which I used to work in NYC, they moved their datacenter to be next door to the exchange's datacenter just to reduce latency.

Because in HFT, every fraction of a second can mean the difference between 10s or even 100s of millions of dollars in profit/loss.

Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by gcb0 on Sunday September 30, 2018 @03:57PM (#18108043)
And we as a society know that and think it is normal. Crazy.
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by hazz99 on Monday October 01, 2018 @02:10AM (#18110371)
I don't think it's a bad thing - theyre business model relies upon low latency, and so they do everything they can to reduce it
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by gcb0 on Monday October 01, 2018 @10:35AM (#18112853)
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by analognoise on Sunday September 30, 2018 @12:33PM (#18106851)
You're right. A 100MHz clock has a period of 10nS. I can tell you exactly how many of them my data path will take (I've only ever used clocks up to about 300MHz in an FPGA - 600 for things like DDR4 memory).

What GP means is that the portion of the overall latency which you can control must respond as quickly as possible, and you do count nanoseconds. Obviously HFT has not invented superluminal communication techniques.

Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by zkms on Sunday September 30, 2018 @01:39PM (#18107228)
> Obviously HFT has not invented superluminal communication techniques.

They haven't, but they've put in tremendous resources into going above the speed of light in optical fibre, including the use of point-to-point microwave links and, when it's impossible to place towers for microwave links (for example, across the Atlantic Ocean), the use of HF/shortwave (as in 3-30MHz stuff) radio.

Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by fileeditview on Sunday September 30, 2018 @01:52PM (#18107310)
My question may show my ignorance but how would anyone or anything go above the speed of light? Could you elaborate please?
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by detaro on Sunday September 30, 2018 @01:54PM (#18107320)
Speed of light in fibre is lower than speed of light in air, so you can beat fibre speed of light by building fast wireless networks.
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by fileeditview on Sunday September 30, 2018 @02:06PM (#18107391)
Thanks. I just looked it up and really wasn't aware of the huge difference.
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by diggerNick6771 on Sunday September 30, 2018 @03:37PM (#18107943)
It's not really the fibre that slows down the signal as much as the opto-electrical repeaters that relay the signal many times as it travels vast distances.

Light can only go a few km before it needs to be boosted

Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by datenwolf on Sunday September 30, 2018 @05:08PM (#18108429)
This is wrong on both accounts.

The speed of light in a fiber is only about 70% of speed of light in vacuum.

Modern single mode fiber has very low attenuation (less than 0.01dB/km). But more importantly you don't have to use opto-electrical repeaters to boost the signal. What you do is using purely passive dispersion control by mixing different kinds of fiber and compensate for the rest dispersion using chirped fiber bragg gratings. To boost the signal you splice in rare earth doped fibers (Erbirum, Yttrium) which acts as optically pumped optical amplifier.

Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by zoggenhoff on Sunday September 30, 2018 @09:45PM (#18109453)
When you write "modern" how long ago would that have been installed?

/me trying to get a handle on optical development.

Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by datenwolf on Monday October 01, 2018 @10:14AM (#18112680)
The basic principle has been invented over 30 years ago in 1987: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4258955

They're used in long haul communication for some 15 years or so. They're especially useful in submarine cables, for the sole reason, that new optical transmission schemes(modulation, wavelength multiplexing and so on) can be implemented by just replacing the equipment on either end, without the need to replace components down there on the seabed.

Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by joejoint on Sunday September 30, 2018 @03:35PM (#18107930)
Speed of light is a universal physical constant. What you referring is that the space the light has to travel in the optic cable is way bigger then what it would be with straight line of sight between MW towers.
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by detaro on Sunday September 30, 2018 @03:54PM (#18108029)
The constant referred to as "speed of light" is speed of light in vacuum. Light slows down different amounts in different media.
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by mhh__ on Sunday September 30, 2018 @04:12PM (#18108133)
Semantics, at best...
Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by Cyph0n on Sunday September 30, 2018 @06:37PM (#18108828)
> x86s always get the latest semiconductor processes, while FPGAs always lag

Two issues with this:

1) You cannot compare an FPGA architecture to a general purpose CPU. FPGAs are massively parallel by design and have near zero overhead, so 100 MHz in an FPGA != a 100 MHz CPU.

2) FPGAs do not lag that far behind and are moving to 16 nm and beyond for higher end products. Besides, due to 1), there really is no real need to move to lower nodes yet.

Re:OCaml All the Way Down – How Jane Street Builds FPGA Desi... by analognoise on Sunday September 30, 2018 @12:13PM (#18106758)
Lots of things depend on latency, which an FPGA can tune by creating custom data pipelines. Microseconds is really a long time in FPGA land.

But more importantly, FPGAs are parallel in a way conventional processors aren't.