In case someone has a video editing desktop that would be sweet even though this can be bypassed by creating multiple batchfiles to select with which GPU you want to mine.

Right, I'm not showing them on the ui currently - they will be shown in the next version on the ui and their amount will be accessible via json-rpc.

Since you've pointed out that you're getting TCP errors on your network before zm reconnects (TCP Retransmissions in particualar): I'm not dealing with the TCP/IP layer in zm, that's the responsibility of the kernel. It seems that your router/nat has troubles to keep multiple connections open, it just closes them after some time.

I can monitor the network, but the funny thing is the network only does this with your miner, it does not happen with any other program or configuration. and it happens only on 1 computer. if what you suggest were true, it would have several disconnections for all computers at the same time. But it doesn't. Everything points to be something in your code triggering some weird configuration on the latest ubuntu update (since I updated both ubuntu and your miner at the same time).

I'll take a look at the NAT/routing tables in the kernel and see if I can find out what is going on.

Sigh.

That's what I was trying to say ZM uses multiple constantly opened connection, it seems that your router/nat has troubles to keep multiple connections constantly open. That's most likely why you're not seeing this behavior with other programs which are using only one connection.

Edit:
                                                                                                                       
Not necessarily. Your router might drop the connections to a particular host only.

This might be very helpful to debug the issue. What's different on this PC? Does it have more GPUs such that it opens more connections? Are the GPUs faster/slower such that they produce more/less shares/network traffic?

Thx, that's the 3rd time I get this error report. Are your GPUs overclocked? If yes, might you pls try without overclocking? If you have time for test, I'll compile a version with more debugging output to check what's causing this.

This doesn't mean it's stable, it's still overclocked. It could crash simply because I'm using different instructions - different compiler - or simply because of different ordering of instructions.


This was requested several times - so yes there will be timestamps.

For me your miner is way more stable than ewfb's. While ewfb's simply hangs in 24-48hrs period on Windows and even sooner under Ubuntu, yours working stable. If only I could figure out how to overclock under Linux on a headless rig...

EDIT: However, It disconnected today twice. Once it just said server disconnected (i'm using nanopool) and failed to restore the connection, despite internet was working flawelessly on all other devices in a household. Restart of the miner itself immediately fixed the issue. And the second time it started throwing some connection errors, and again everything else worked like a charm. Restart fixed it as well.

Thx for reporting. Working internet doesn't mean the server is reachable, the server itself might have issues - however I've fixed a bug in my reconnection procedure which was introduced by a change of error codes in one of my functions. I'm currently testing 0.5.1, if it passes tests I'll upload it today.

If it starts throwing connections errors pls post them here since I'm unable to fix them otherwise. I'm pretty verbose in my networking code currently some of the messages can be safely ignored, they are there to make debugging easier.

Thx for reporting. Seems like I'm heavier on the CPU side. This is partially because of the strict separation of the GPUs and the way I'm preparing work for the GPUs I guess, I don't want to give up both since they have benefits.                                           

This is what I'm getting on a 10GPU system (6*1070 + 4*1080Ti) with an i3-7300T (a 35W CPU).                                   

CPU performance isn't currently an issue for most users as you can see how an i3-7300T performs, so I'm not focusing on it now, I'll do more CPU optimization work after I'm done with the current requests. Sry for the delay.