[ANN] Miner Control 1.6.1 - Auto profit switching miner controller

[Travis9x]

so how does this compare with Awesomeminer, pretty much the same? (in terms of profitability)

Awesome miner seems glittery/polished, but i just care about performance

It uses the same calculations, but has more functionality and supports more pools.

But still doesn't work well with ccMiner, despite their claims.  I'm sticking with Miner Control, because it's more stable, and Awesome Miner doesn't really support any more pools (that I would use) than Miner Control anyway.
Awesome Miner was originally built for AMD GPUs and ASIC hardware, and not really intended to be free software either.  A free version, and "support" for NVIDIA cards were both just kinda thrown in to try to increase their customer base.  The free version may be acceptable for small-time miners (which I am), but it's still rather limited, and simply not stable enough for people using NVIDIA cards.  If I had an ASIC miner, then I would probably use Awesome Miner to control it, but I would still use Miner Control for my GPUs.

[DemosMirak]

so how does this compare with Awesomeminer, pretty much the same? (in terms of profitability)

Awesome miner seems glittery/polished, but i just care about performance

It uses the same calculations, but has more functionality and supports more pools.

But still doesn't work well with ccMiner, despite their claims.  I'm sticking with Miner Control, because it's more stable, and Awesome Miner doesn't really support any more pools (that I would use) than Miner Control anyway.
Awesome Miner was originally built for AMD GPUs and ASIC hardware, and not really intended to be free software either.  A free version, and "support" for NVIDIA cards were both just kinda thrown in to try to increase their customer base.  The free version may be acceptable for small-time miners (which I am), but it's still rather limited, and simply not stable enough for people using NVIDIA cards.  If I had an ASIC miner, then I would probably use Awesome Miner to control it, but I would still use Miner Control for my GPUs.

Something went wrong in my brain, and I though you were comparing Miner Control to Nicehash Control. Don't know were that came from, sorry. I have no experience with Awesome Miner. Some quick research shows that I was still correct, but I can't say anything about stability, which is, as you say, more important.

[Infinity123]

Here is my error.log

https://mega.co.nz/#!Egg1wR4B!1N-jZBxHpLgUOd_FHqIMH0KEhW-t_oPpm9-8pdZ4uTE

[StuffOfInterest]

Here is my error.log

https://mega.co.nz/#!Egg1wR4B!1N-jZBxHpLgUOd_FHqIMH0KEhW-t_oPpm9-8pdZ4uTE

What symptoms are you experiencing?  At first glance, I see some issues contacting remote sites (which is common) and when killing off miners (which can happen).

[StuffOfInterest]

so how does this compare with Awesomeminer, pretty much the same? (in terms of profitability)

Awesome miner seems glittery/polished, but i just care about performance

It uses the same calculations, but has more functionality and supports more pools.

But still doesn't work well with ccMiner, despite their claims.  I'm sticking with Miner Control, because it's more stable, and Awesome Miner doesn't really support any more pools (that I would use) than Miner Control anyway.
Awesome Miner was originally built for AMD GPUs and ASIC hardware, and not really intended to be free software either.  A free version, and "support" for NVIDIA cards were both just kinda thrown in to try to increase their customer base.  The free version may be acceptable for small-time miners (which I am), but it's still rather limited, and simply not stable enough for people using NVIDIA cards.  If I had an ASIC miner, then I would probably use Awesome Miner to control it, but I would still use Miner Control for my GPUs.

Something went wrong in my brain, and I though you were comparing Miner Control to Nicehash Control. Don't know were that came from, sorry. I have no experience with Awesome Miner. Some quick research shows that I was still correct, but I can't say anything about stability, which is, as you say, more important.

Miner Control grew out of NiceHash Control.  Started out on the same code base and then evolved much further.  I wouldn't use NiceHash Control anymore as it is no longer supported.

I haven't looked to deep at Awesomeminer but it appears to be more of a kitchen sink application doing lots of different things where Miner Control is focused just on switching.  Which is better for a particular person is going to come down to what they want to do.  I'm not a UI person so Miner Control will always have a fairly basic interface.

[StuffOfInterest]

New version, 1.1.0.



Download: http://stuffofinterest.com/MinerControl/MinerControl-1.1.0.zip

Lots of reworking on the internal code to make things cleaner and maybe more stable.

New service grid which displays balances from each service as returned by their API.

Ability to control sort mode of grid (see first post).

Ability to control type of miner kill used (see first post).

Next up on the list will be donation mining as I'm spending far too much time on this project. 

[ltc_bilic]

Very nice, testing it out now! I'm redirecting my miners to you're address for a while and I encourage everyone else to do the same

It would be very cool if you could add an overall balance (sum of all balances), now that you have the actual prices from APIs

[Infinity123]

Here is my error.log

https://mega.co.nz/#!Egg1wR4B!1N-jZBxHpLgUOd_FHqIMH0KEhW-t_oPpm9-8pdZ4uTE

What symptoms are you experiencing?  At first glance, I see some issues contacting remote sites (which is common) and when killing off miners (which can happen).

Well sometimes when I check my rig I can see that MC has crashed and left the last most profitable algo running.

[StuffOfInterest]

Here is my error.log

https://mega.co.nz/#!Egg1wR4B!1N-jZBxHpLgUOd_FHqIMH0KEhW-t_oPpm9-8pdZ4uTE

What symptoms are you experiencing?  At first glance, I see some issues contacting remote sites (which is common) and when killing off miners (which can happen).

Well sometimes when I check my rig I can see that MC has crashed and left the last most profitable algo running.

Yuck.  Try 1.1.0 please.  Being that the price updates happen asynchronously there is a chance of two threads trying to update the same place at the same time which can cause a crash.  1.1 has some new protections to avoid this happening.  If you have this crash happen after putting 1.1 in the error log probably won't help  as it only shows errors which were caught and logged.  An uncaught error is what is crashing the application.  For that you'll have to look in the windows event log for a .NET message.

I'm going to investigate if there is a way to put a try/catch statement around the entire application to handle situations like you are seeing.

Thanks.

[yudhistira]

Good Job  

on top table all balance show up
but not showed on bottom table (TMB and Yaamp)

[StuffOfInterest]

Good Job  

on top table all balance show up
but not showed on bottom table (TMB and Yaamp)

Only NiceHash and WestHash provide per algorithm balances via their API so they will be the only ones showing in the bottom table.

[lextad]

thanks for this program  but since the last update i still getting a error.log the no was getting before
thanks for your help

Code:

9/24/2014 11:13:26 PM
----------------------------------------------
Type: KeyNotFoundException
Message: The given key was not present in the dictionary.
Stack trace:    at System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary`2.get_Item(TKey key)
   at MinerControl.Services.TradeMyBitService.DownloadStringBalanceCompleted(Object sender, DownloadStringCompletedEventArgs e)

[StuffOfInterest]

thanks for this program  but since the last update i still getting a error.log the no was getting before
thanks for your help

Code:

9/24/2014 11:13:26 PM
----------------------------------------------
Type: KeyNotFoundException
Message: The given key was not present in the dictionary.
Stack trace:    at System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary`2.get_Item(TKey key)
   at MinerControl.Services.TradeMyBitService.DownloadStringBalanceCompleted(Object sender, DownloadStringCompletedEventArgs e)

Do you have your TradeMyBit API key set in the configuration file?  This looks like you are sending a missing or invalid API key to TradeMyBit.

[frazier34567]

I walked in to this morning that Minercontrol 1.1.0 had crashed.  The miner itself was still going. however the MC had crashed.  So I closed it and reopened and it was running.

I looked through the event viewer and found this at 8:54:23 AM

Code:

Faulting application name: MinerControl.exe, version: 1.1.0.0, time stamp: 0x54214822
Faulting module name: USER32.dll, version: 6.1.7601.17514, time stamp: 0x4ce7ba59
Exception code: 0xc00000fd
Fault offset: 0x000206e6
Faulting process id: 0x188c
Faulting application start time: 0x01cfd75fcdadf1c1
Faulting application path: C:\minercontrol\MinerControl.exe
Faulting module path: C:\Windows\syswow64\USER32.dll
Report Id: 74355de1-44bb-11e4-9396-0220fc700701

Exception code: 0xc00000fd is a STATUS_STACK_OVERFLOW issue.  

I found this.
"this error generally comes when your array size is full and still you are adding value on it. So please debug your code then only you will get problem and solution as well." http://forums.asp.net/t/1811350.aspx?Stack+overflow+exception+0xC00000FD+Exception

Also I found this article about catching a STACK_OVERFLOW Exception's

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/jaredpar/archive/2008/10/22/when-can-you-catch-a-stackoverflowexception.aspx

My last error in my log is however there is over 5 hours between these errors and the error above.

Code:

	9/25/2014 3:31:42 AM
	----------------------------------------------
	Type: TargetInvocationException
	Message: An exception occurred during the operation, making the result invalid.  Check InnerException for exception details.
	Stack trace:    at System.ComponentModel.AsyncCompletedEventArgs.RaiseExceptionIfNecessary()
	at System.Net.DownloadStringCompletedEventArgs.get_Result()
	at MinerControl.Services.TradeMyBitService.DownloadStringBalanceCompleted(Object sender, DownloadStringCompletedEventArgs e)
	
	9/25/2014 3:31:42 AM
	----------------------------------------------
	Type: WebException
	Message: The remote server returned an error: (524) Origin Time-out.
	Stack trace:    at System.Net.HttpWebRequest.EndGetResponse(IAsyncResult asyncResult)
	at System.Net.WebClient.GetWebResponse(WebRequest request, IAsyncResult result)
	at System.Net.WebClient.DownloadBitsResponseCallback(IAsyncResult result)

I hope it helps.  This is on Windows 7 64 bit OS
 Start of my config file.

Code:

{
    "general": {
        "power": 0.001,
        "exchange": 500,
        "mintime": 4,
        "maxtime": 240,
        "switchtime": 1,
        "deadtime": 10
    },

[DemosMirak]

Perhaps a small feature request:
Check the balances the pools give, and compare it to what it should be, according to your calculations. Based on that, suggest a weight. For Nice- and Westhash, this could be done on a per-algo basis. You would have to change the .conf file yourself, and of course the program wouldn't remember the number after restarting, but still, I think it would be nice to have.

[StuffOfInterest]

I walked in to this morning that Minercontrol 1.1.0 had crashed.  The miner itself was still going. however the MC had crashed.  So I closed it and reopened and it was running.

I looked through the event viewer and found this at 8:54:23 AM

Code:

Faulting application name: MinerControl.exe, version: 1.1.0.0, time stamp: 0x54214822
Faulting module name: USER32.dll, version: 6.1.7601.17514, time stamp: 0x4ce7ba59
Exception code: 0xc00000fd
Fault offset: 0x000206e6
Faulting process id: 0x188c
Faulting application start time: 0x01cfd75fcdadf1c1
Faulting application path: C:\minercontrol\MinerControl.exe
Faulting module path: C:\Windows\syswow64\USER32.dll
Report Id: 74355de1-44bb-11e4-9396-0220fc700701

Exception code: 0xc00000fd is a STATUS_STACK_OVERFLOW issue.  

I found this.
"this error generally comes when your array size is full and still you are adding value on it. So please debug your code then only you will get problem and solution as well." http://forums.asp.net/t/1811350.aspx?Stack+overflow+exception+0xC00000FD+Exception

Also I found this article about catching a STACK_OVERFLOW Exception's

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/jaredpar/archive/2008/10/22/when-can-you-catch-a-stackoverflowexception.aspx

My last error in my log is however there is over 5 hours between these errors and the error above.

Code:

	9/25/2014 3:31:42 AM
	----------------------------------------------
	Type: TargetInvocationException
	Message: An exception occurred during the operation, making the result invalid.  Check InnerException for exception details.
	Stack trace:    at System.ComponentModel.AsyncCompletedEventArgs.RaiseExceptionIfNecessary()
	at System.Net.DownloadStringCompletedEventArgs.get_Result()
	at MinerControl.Services.TradeMyBitService.DownloadStringBalanceCompleted(Object sender, DownloadStringCompletedEventArgs e)
	
	9/25/2014 3:31:42 AM
	----------------------------------------------
	Type: WebException
	Message: The remote server returned an error: (524) Origin Time-out.
	Stack trace:    at System.Net.HttpWebRequest.EndGetResponse(IAsyncResult asyncResult)
	at System.Net.WebClient.GetWebResponse(WebRequest request, IAsyncResult result)
	at System.Net.WebClient.DownloadBitsResponseCallback(IAsyncResult result)

I hope it helps.  This is on Windows 7 64 bit OS
 Start of my config file.

Code:

{
    "general": {
        "power": 0.001,
        "exchange": 500,
        "mintime": 4,
        "maxtime": 240,
        "switchtime": 1,
        "deadtime": 10
    },

Thanks for all that information, it really helps.

The two exceptions from the log you listed are when the remote service api times out.  Nothing to worry about there.  Your stack overflow error, on the other hand, scares the hell out of me.  I really need a stack trace to help pin down where this is being triggered but I'm not sure if one is even generated for this type of event and there is no way to capture it inside of the code.

I'm also running Windows 7 64-bit so I don't think it is an OS specific issue.  I've had the controller running since I released the new version with no issue.  Has this happened to you before or is this a one time only event?

Reading up on the stack overflows in .NET, there are a few types of conditions which could cause them.  I'll take a look through the code to see if I can spot any of the patterns mentioned.  One area which is harder to check is how the grids on the screen interact with the data collections used in the back end.  If this error has happened to you more than once there is one thing you could try. Add '"gridsortmode": 0' to the general configuration section of the config file.  This will turn off sorting of the grid which requires rebinding the list of items to the control.  From what I've read this is one place where errors of this nature could occur.

[StuffOfInterest]

Perhaps a small feature request:
Check the balances the pools give, and compare it to what it should be, according to your calculations. Based on that, suggest a weight. For Nice- and Westhash, this could be done on a per-algo basis. You would have to change the .conf file yourself, and of course the program wouldn't remember the number after restarting, but still, I think it would be nice to have.

Interesting idea but one big problem.  What if you have more than one machine mining to the same account?  For one machine this would be possible, just capture the balance when we start mining an algorithm and then divide the change by time as we mine.  Unfortunately, if another miner adds to that balance everything gets thrown out of wack.

[DemosMirak]

Perhaps a small feature request:
Check the balances the pools give, and compare it to what it should be, according to your calculations. Based on that, suggest a weight. For Nice- and Westhash, this could be done on a per-algo basis. You would have to change the .conf file yourself, and of course the program wouldn't remember the number after restarting, but still, I think it would be nice to have.

Interesting idea but one big problem.  What if you have more than one machine mining to the same account?  For one machine this would be possible, just capture the balance when we start mining an algorithm and then divide the change by time as we mine.  Unfortunately, if another miner adds to that balance everything gets thrown out of wack.

I happen to be a part-time miner, from my gaming rig .

As for the problem, and this will be a suggestion only feasible in long term, depending on how far you want to go, but perhaps Miner Control could have a controlling function over multiple rigs, over the home network maybe? That way it could integrate multiple rigs. Or perhaps via the internet, but that's even harder to set-up, I would think. Not sure though, not a programmer myself.

[StuffOfInterest]

Perhaps a small feature request:
Check the balances the pools give, and compare it to what it should be, according to your calculations. Based on that, suggest a weight. For Nice- and Westhash, this could be done on a per-algo basis. You would have to change the .conf file yourself, and of course the program wouldn't remember the number after restarting, but still, I think it would be nice to have.

Interesting idea but one big problem.  What if you have more than one machine mining to the same account?  For one machine this would be possible, just capture the balance when we start mining an algorithm and then divide the change by time as we mine.  Unfortunately, if another miner adds to that balance everything gets thrown out of wack.

I happen to be a part-time miner, from my gaming rig .

As for the problem, and this will be a suggestion only feasible in long term, depending on how far you want to go, but perhaps Miner Control could have a controlling function over multiple rigs, over the home network maybe? That way it could integrate multiple rigs. Or perhaps via the internet, but that's even harder to set-up, I would think. Not sure though, not a programmer myself.

Controlling multiple rigs is something I've considered but it is way down on the priority list.  I have two machines mining at home now, one I hardly ever look at in person, so being able to remote monitor would be nice.

[StuffOfInterest]

Just put out release 1.1.1 which may fix the stack overflow crash reported earlier.  I was doing something stupid when sorting the price grid and this release switches to a more acceptable way of sorting with the grid display.  Sorry for the headaches people have been having with unexplained crashes.  Please let me know if this does not fix it.

Also, I've seen a few payment the last couple of days from the services on the donation address.  Thank you very much to those doing some manual donation mining until I can get a configurable way to implement it.