Re: [ANN] TeamRedMiner 0.3.8 - CNv8 - Vega 64 2200+h/s Rx470 1025+h/s Low Power Draw
Aight Randy aka smeads, I'm normally all about courtesy and being polite, but that has to be a two-way street, no?
First you dump 200 lines of Powershell output because you failed to RTFM in the release README.md or the frontpage of this ANN thread, more specifically API: The miner includes a read-only api based on the sgminer-5.5 API. Both the json and text formats are supported. For more details, we refer to the sgminer api documentation.. I assume you're not familiar with cgminer/sgminer/ccminer, and a google search for "sgminer api" was way too much to ask?
Next, when explained that this is a plain TCP/IP socket API, you whine about it with the following nugget...
...because writing json over a plain TCP/IP socket connection and parsing the json response in a Powershell script is too much to ask for a devops engineer running "the largest Cryptonote calc site on the planet"? It should be a 10-15 line PS function. Anyway, I respect any decision you make in this regard, it's none of my business really.
However, what I don't respect is that you then proceed to do some 40 line advertisement post for your "Shitcoin Profit Manager" (sic) and of course have to top it off with another insult:
Also.....1 more thing. Fastest is debatable. I use SRB for my AMD GPU's, and this miner was only a few hashes faster than SRB on 580's. Factor in a high % dev fee, and the earnings do not look as good.
Yeah... So let me ask you this: maybe the biggest CN profit calc site on the planet should include power draw and power cost when estimating the most profitable coin/miner? This miner can't do more than being the absolute tightest CNv2 kernel in all latency-critical parts of the algo. For the users that don't work very hard on their straps and clocks, they will "only" benefit from this by a lower power draw, not a higher hashrate. For Polaris cards, all miners are also very close to saturating the theoretical bandwidth, again meaning that the pros of this miner will only show if you care about wattage. For Vegas, let me know when another miner can produce 2400+ h/s reads on Vega 64 LCs or FEs at the same power draw and we can talk about the fastest CN miner.
Fwiw, we might add a built-in http adapter for the api at some point. We don't like pulling in external dependencies, even if the open source license is permissive. We might make an exception for this though.
First you dump 200 lines of Powershell output because you failed to RTFM in the release README.md or the frontpage of this ANN thread, more specifically API: The miner includes a read-only api based on the sgminer-5.5 API. Both the json and text formats are supported. For more details, we refer to the sgminer api documentation.. I assume you're not familiar with cgminer/sgminer/ccminer, and a google search for "sgminer api" was way too much to ask?
Next, when explained that this is a plain TCP/IP socket API, you whine about it with the following nugget...
Yuck. Ok.... I'm passing on this miner. 
...because writing json over a plain TCP/IP socket connection and parsing the json response in a Powershell script is too much to ask for a devops engineer running "the largest Cryptonote calc site on the planet"? It should be a 10-15 line PS function. Anyway, I respect any decision you make in this regard, it's none of my business really.
However, what I don't respect is that you then proceed to do some 40 line advertisement post for your "Shitcoin Profit Manager" (sic) and of course have to top it off with another insult:
Also.....1 more thing. Fastest is debatable. I use SRB for my AMD GPU's, and this miner was only a few hashes faster than SRB on 580's. Factor in a high % dev fee, and the earnings do not look as good.
Yeah... So let me ask you this: maybe the biggest CN profit calc site on the planet should include power draw and power cost when estimating the most profitable coin/miner? This miner can't do more than being the absolute tightest CNv2 kernel in all latency-critical parts of the algo. For the users that don't work very hard on their straps and clocks, they will "only" benefit from this by a lower power draw, not a higher hashrate. For Polaris cards, all miners are also very close to saturating the theoretical bandwidth, again meaning that the pros of this miner will only show if you care about wattage. For Vegas, let me know when another miner can produce 2400+ h/s reads on Vega 64 LCs or FEs at the same power draw and we can talk about the fastest CN miner.
Fwiw, we might add a built-in http adapter for the api at some point. We don't like pulling in external dependencies, even if the open source license is permissive. We might make an exception for this though.