Is there an overhead using "seconds" bars?

[astrolobe]

I am trying to create a chart that contains bars that are exactly 1/25 (one-twenty-fifth) of a day, i.e., a 57.6 minute bar chart. Obviously this is not possible, so I opted for 58 minute bars.
My question: If I use a 3456 second bar, which is exactly 57.6 minutes, is there an increase in overhead because I am using seconds instead of minutes. In other words, will the data volume increase and/or the processing cycles for using 3456 minutes bars as opposed to 58 minutes bars?
thanks.

[NinjaTrader_Dierk]

>> will the data volume increase
Definitely. I suggest sticking with minute bars if possible.

[astrolobe]

Will the data volume only increase if I have the "Store real-time bar data" option checked?
Does each 3456th second bar need to store data for every "second", to be able to create a 3456 second bar?

[NinjaTrader_Dierk]

no and yes

[astrolobe]

Sorry, but lastly, will the extra data be automatically deleted when I close the chart, if I have "Store real-time bar data" UNchecked?

[NinjaTrader_Dierk]

Not sure what you mean by "deleted". Not having option below checked only prevents real time data from being recorded.

[astrolobe]

Earlier you said there would definitely be an increase in the data volume.

I am trying to determine in more detail what this impact is, and how I can best work around it, as I need to use the 3456 second bars. I am trying to quantify what the exact impact will be to my computer resources (disk space and network traffic), because if I understand it better, I might be able to tolerate the impact.
These 3456 second bars are only needed on 4 instrument that go back about 2 weeks on each chart.

[NinjaTrader_Dierk]

Please see my post #2 below. Other than that you would need to try by yourself in order to find out.