Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Unsolved
Collapse
Discussion Forum to share and further the development of home control and automation, independent of platforms.
  1. Home
  2. Software
  3. Multi-System Reactor
  4. Logic loop? Throttling...
How to upgrade from an old version of MSR?
cw-kidC
Hello I haven't updated my installation of MSR in a very long time. Its a bare metal Linux install currently on version 24366-3de60836 I see the latest version is now latest-26011-c621bbc7 I assume I cannot just jump from a very old version to the latest version? Or can I? Thanks
Multi-System Reactor
Can you run MSR on Home Assistant OS ?
cw-kidC
Looking at using Home Assistant for the first time, either on a Home Assistant Green, their own hardware or buying a cheap second hand mini PC. Sounds like Home Assistant OS is linux based using Docker for HA etc. Would I also be able to install things like MSR as well on their OS ? Thanks.
Multi-System Reactor
Self test
CatmanV2C
Having been messing around with some stuff I worked a way to self trigger some tests that I wanted to do on the HA <> MSR integration This got me wondering if there's an entity that changes state / is exposed when a configured controller goes off line? I can't see one but thought it might be hidden or something? Cheers C
Multi-System Reactor
Access control - allowing anonymous user to dashboard
tunnusT
Using build 25328 and having the following users.yaml configuration: users: # This section defines your valid users. admin: ******* groups: # This section defines your user groups. Optionally, it defines application # and API access restrictions (ACLs) for the group. Users may belong to # more than one group. Again, no required or special groups here. admin_group: users: - admin applications: true # special form allows access to ALL applications guests: users: "*" applications: - dashboard api_acls: # This ACL allows users in the "admin" group to access the API - url: "/api" group: admin_group allow: true log: true # This ACL allows anyone/thing to access the /api/v1/alive API endpoint - url: "/api/v1/alive" allow: true session: timeout: 7200 # (seconds) rolling: true # activity extends timeout when true # If log_acls is true, the selected ACL for every API access is logged. log_acls: true # If debug_acls is true, even more information about ACL selection is logged. debug_acls: true My goal is to allow anonymous user to dashboard, but MSR is still asking for a password when trying to access that. Nothing in the logs related to dashboard access. Probably an error in the configuration, but help needed to find that. Tried to put url: "/dashboard" under api_acls, but that was a long shot and didn't work.
Multi-System Reactor
VEC Virtual Switch Auto Off
S
I use Virtual Entity Controller virtual switches which I turn on via webhooks from other applications. Once a switch triggers and turns on, I can then activate associated rules. I would like each virtual switch to automatically turn off after a configurable time (e.g., 5 seconds, 10 seconds). Is there a better way to achieve this auto-off behavior instead of creating a separate rule for each switch that uses the 'Condition must be sustained for' option to turn it off? With a large number of these switches (and the associated turn-off rules), I'm checking to see if there is a simpler approach.If not, could this be a feature request to add an auto-off timer directly to the virtual switches. Thanks Reactor (Multi-hub) latest-26011-c621bbc7 VirtualEntityController v25356 Synology Docker
Multi-System Reactor
Upcoming Storage Change -- Got Back-ups?
toggledbitsT
TL;DR: Format of data in storage directory will soon change. Make sure you are backing up the contents of that directory in its entirety, and you preserve your backups for an extended period, particularly the backup you take right before upgrading to the build containing this change (date of that is still to be determined, but soon). The old data format will remain readable (so you'll be able to read your pre-change backups) for the foreseeable future. In support of a number of other changes in the works, I have found it necessary to change the storage format for Reactor objects in storage at the physical level. Until now, plain, standard JSON has been used to store the data (everything under the storage directory). This has served well, but has a few limitations, including no real support for native JavaScript objects like Date, Map, Set, and others. It also is unable to store data that contains "loops" — objects that reference themselves in some way. I'm not sure exactly when, but in the not-too-distant future I will publish a build using the new data format. It will automatically convert existing JSON data to the new format. For the moment, it will save data in both the new format and the old JSON format, preferring the former when loading data from storage. I have been running my own home with this new format for several months, and have no issues with data loss or corruption. A few other things to know: If you are not already backing up your storage directory, you should be. At a minimum, back this directory up every time you make big changes to your Rules, Reactions, etc. Your existing JSON-format backups will continue to be readable for the long-term (years). The code that loads data from these files looks for the new file format first (which will have a .dval suffix), and if not found, will happily read (and convert) a same-basenamed .json file (i.e. it looks for ruleid.dval first, and if it doesn't find it, it tries to load ruleid.json). I'll publish detailed instructions for restoring from old backups when the build is posted (it's easy). The new .dval files are not directly human-readable or editable as easily as the old .json files. A new utility will be provided in the tools directory to convert .dval data to .json format, which you can then read or edit if you find that necessary. However, that may not work for all future data, as my intent is to make more native JavaScript objects directly storable, and many of those objects cannot be stored in JSON. You may need to modify your backup tools/scripts to pick up the new files: if you explicitly name .json files (rather than just specifying the entire storage directory) in your backup configuration, you will need to add .dval files to get a complete, accurate backup. I don't think this will be an issue for any of you; I imagine that you're all just backing up the entire contents of storage regardless of format/name, that is the safest (and IMO most correct) way to go (if that's not what you're doing, consider changing your approach). The current code stores the data in both the .dval form and the .json form to hedge against any real-world problems I don't encounter in my own use. Some future build will drop this redundancy (i.e. save only to .dval form). However, the read code for the .json form will remain in any case. This applies only to persistent storage that Reactor creates and controls under the storage tree. All other JSON data files (e.g. device data for Controllers) are unaffected by this change and will remain in that form. YAML files are also unaffected by this change. This thread is open for any questions or concerns.
Multi-System Reactor
Oddness in Copy/Move of Reactions
G
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[Solved] function isRuleEnabled() issue
CrilleC
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[Reactor] Problem with Global Reactions and groups
therealdbT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Possible feature request 2?
CatmanV2C
Just another thought. Adding devices from my Home Assistant / Zigbee2MQTT integration. Works perfectly but they always add as their IEEE address. Some of these devices have up to 10 entities associated, and the moment they are renamed to something sensible, each of those entities 'ceases to exist' in MSR. I like things tidy, and deleting each defunct entity needs 3 clicks. Any chance of a 'bulk delete' option? No biggy as I've pretty much finished my Z-wave migration and I don't expect to be adding more than 2 new Zigbee devices Cheers C
Multi-System Reactor
Reactor (Multi-System/Multi-Hub) Announcements
toggledbitsT
Build 21228 has been released. Docker images available from DockerHub as usual, and bare-metal packages here. Home Assistant up to version 2021.8.6 supported; the online version of the manual will now state the current supported versions; Fix an error in OWMWeatherController that could cause it to stop updating; Unify the approach to entity filtering on all hub interface classes (controllers); this works for device entities only; it may be extended to other entities later; Improve error detail in messages for EzloController during auth phase; Add isRuleSet() and isRuleEnabled() functions to expressions extensions; Implement set action for lock and passage capabilities (makes them more easily scriptable in some cases); Fix a place in the UI where 24-hour time was not being displayed.
Multi-System Reactor
Copying a global reaction
tunnusT
With build 25328, if you copy a global reaction, a new reaction does not appear in the UI unless you do a refresh. I recall this used to work without needing this page refresh? Anyway, only a minor nuisance.
Multi-System Reactor
[Reactor] Bug when sending MQTT boolean payloads
therealdbT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Difficulty defining repeating annual period
R
I have tried numerous ways to define a recurring annual period, for example from December 15 to January 15. No matter which method I try - after and before, between, after and/not after, Reactor reports "waiting for invalid date, invalid date. Some constructs also seem to cause Reactor to hang, timeout and restart. For example "before January 15 is evaluated as true, but reports "waiting for invalid date, invalid date". Does anyone have a tried and true method to define a recurring annual period? I think the "between" that I used successfully in the past may have broken with one of the updates.
Multi-System Reactor
Need help with sequence
T
Good evening all, For about the past week or so, I've been having problems with a specific rule in my home automation that controls when my home goes from an Away mode to Home mode. One of the conditions it checked for was my alarm panel, when it changed from Armed Away to Disarmed. There seems to have been a firmware update on the panel that added an intermittent step of "pending", and I can't say for certain it happens 100% of the time. Is there a way to write a condition that so it changes from one condition, to the next, and then another condition? As in, Home alarm changes from armed_away to pending to disarmed. Thanks.
Multi-System Reactor
Possible feature request?
CatmanV2C
No idea how easy this would be. During my migration away from Z-wave I've been replacing the Z-wave devices with Sonoff which has broken some of my automations. Any chance of a 'Test Reaction' function to call out which ones are broken because an entity no longer exists? Without actually running the reaction? Or does this exist already and I'm just not aware of how to do it? Obviously I can see entities that are no longer available, but not quite what I'm looking for. I guess it's something of an edge case so no huge issue. TIA! C
Multi-System Reactor
Logic Assistance: Exterior Lights on when Illuminance Below Threshold
PablaP
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Time series documentation
tunnusT
Is the current manual (incl. examples) up to date with how retention value is handled in time series configuration? Referring to this post
Multi-System Reactor
MQTT templates for ZIgbee scene controller, or a better way?
CatmanV2C
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Reset a delay
CatmanV2C
I'm sure this has been asked, and answered, but damned if I can figure it out Use case: I have a rear garden with lights. A door from the kitchen into the garden and a door from the garage. Currently if I open the kitchen door the lights come on (yay) and a 3 minute delay starts. After 3 minutes, no matter what else happens, the lights go off (Boo! But also yay!) What I would like is for the 3 minute delay until the lights go off to start from the latest door open event. That is, if I'm going from kitchen to garage, and back again, the lights stay on until there's three minutes of no activity. I've tried 'hacking' with a virtual switch, but can't seem to stop the delay. Any pointers? TIA C
Multi-System Reactor

Logic loop? Throttling...

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Multi-System Reactor
11 Posts 2 Posters 1.3k Views 2 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • toggledbitsT Offline
    toggledbitsT Offline
    toggledbits
    wrote on last edited by
    #2

    Update to 21281. It would be great if everyone would make sure they are on the latest release before reporting problems.

    Author of Multi-system Reactor and Reactor, DelayLight, Switchboard, and about a dozen other plugins that run on Vera and openLuup.

    wmarcolinW 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • toggledbitsT toggledbits

      Update to 21281. It would be great if everyone would make sure they are on the latest release before reporting problems.

      wmarcolinW Offline
      wmarcolinW Offline
      wmarcolin
      wrote on last edited by
      #3

      @toggledbits master I am already with version 21281, the error started at 21277.

      7b2ad594-81c0-4d52-9844-9d10e6b1da57-image.png

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • toggledbitsT Offline
        toggledbitsT Offline
        toggledbits
        wrote on last edited by toggledbits
        #4

        Sigh. Sorry, I'm running fast today... way too fast, much on my plate.

        So looking at what you've done... I would not do it this way. Put those expressions in the variables they are meant to manipulate.

        Also, your matchEntities() for BatterySensor, you should not include level. That is an attribute of the capability battery_power, and since we're matching capabilities, it won't match anything and creates needless work. You can list capabilities here, but not attributes. All attributes of the capability come with the capability. Same for FaultSensor: remove failed; it's an attribute, not a capability.

        And please, when posting log snippets, showing me just the error is one line away from showing me nothing. I need to see several dozen lines from before the error for context.

        Author of Multi-system Reactor and Reactor, DelayLight, Switchboard, and about a dozen other plugins that run on Vera and openLuup.

        wmarcolinW 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • toggledbitsT toggledbits

          Sigh. Sorry, I'm running fast today... way too fast, much on my plate.

          So looking at what you've done... I would not do it this way. Put those expressions in the variables they are meant to manipulate.

          Also, your matchEntities() for BatterySensor, you should not include level. That is an attribute of the capability battery_power, and since we're matching capabilities, it won't match anything and creates needless work. You can list capabilities here, but not attributes. All attributes of the capability come with the capability. Same for FaultSensor: remove failed; it's an attribute, not a capability.

          And please, when posting log snippets, showing me just the error is one line away from showing me nothing. I need to see several dozen lines from before the error for context.

          wmarcolinW Offline
          wmarcolinW Offline
          wmarcolin
          wrote on last edited by
          #5

          @toggledbits master, as you instructed, I believe this is the correct way to do it, and apparently, the error is gone.

          067eabd9-a914-43c2-be57-b2b210d46741-image.png

          Thanks!

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • toggledbitsT Offline
            toggledbitsT Offline
            toggledbits
            wrote on last edited by toggledbits
            #6

            LOL! OK. Yes, this is better structure-wise. It is much less efficient to use SetVariable to accomplish what is effectively the same as putting the expressions on the variables as you have now done.

            I did replicate your prior structure on my system to try it out, but I was unable to replicate the throttling. Nonetheless, I think I understand why it would have happened... and I'm guessing you have significantly more devices on your system than I have on my development system (maybe, I've got about 100 across the four hubs I use for development). I can see why it would throttle, I just could not make it do it. Nonetheless, I'm going to see what I can do about preventing it, based on my assumption about how it happened for you.

            Another thing... mentioned in another thread is a small step up you could take in efficiency in BatteryMSG: you are doing getEntity() twice on the same ID. You can improve on that by using a temporary variable inside the loop to store the getEntity() result, and use that temporary variable in the string assembly:

            join( each id in BatteryLow: do
                e = getEntity( id ),
                e.name + " " + int( e.attributes.battery_power.level * 100 ) + "%"
            done, ', ' )
            

            The do...done block looks like a single expression to each. The result of a do...done block is the result of the last expression executed within it. That block contains two expressions, the first being the e = getEntity() which does the lookup and stores the value in a temporary variable, and the second which uses the temporary variable to build the result string for the entity. This saves you the cycles looking up the same entity twice.

            Author of Multi-system Reactor and Reactor, DelayLight, Switchboard, and about a dozen other plugins that run on Vera and openLuup.

            wmarcolinW 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • toggledbitsT toggledbits

              LOL! OK. Yes, this is better structure-wise. It is much less efficient to use SetVariable to accomplish what is effectively the same as putting the expressions on the variables as you have now done.

              I did replicate your prior structure on my system to try it out, but I was unable to replicate the throttling. Nonetheless, I think I understand why it would have happened... and I'm guessing you have significantly more devices on your system than I have on my development system (maybe, I've got about 100 across the four hubs I use for development). I can see why it would throttle, I just could not make it do it. Nonetheless, I'm going to see what I can do about preventing it, based on my assumption about how it happened for you.

              Another thing... mentioned in another thread is a small step up you could take in efficiency in BatteryMSG: you are doing getEntity() twice on the same ID. You can improve on that by using a temporary variable inside the loop to store the getEntity() result, and use that temporary variable in the string assembly:

              join( each id in BatteryLow: do
                  e = getEntity( id ),
                  e.name + " " + int( e.attributes.battery_power.level * 100 ) + "%"
              done, ', ' )
              

              The do...done block looks like a single expression to each. The result of a do...done block is the result of the last expression executed within it. That block contains two expressions, the first being the e = getEntity() which does the lookup and stores the value in a temporary variable, and the second which uses the temporary variable to build the result string for the entity. This saves you the cycles looking up the same entity twice.

              wmarcolinW Offline
              wmarcolinW Offline
              wmarcolin
              wrote on last edited by wmarcolin
              #7

              @toggledbits hi my friend!

              The warning message has appeared again.

              5f36db72-ab37-4b81-aff7-532ede046146-image.png

              Looking at the log, it is not an error, this message appears several times intermittently, only being interrupted when another action occurs.

              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:30:35.222Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:10.561Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:10.695Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:11.054Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:12.810Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) SET!
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:22.152Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:33:15.364Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) RESET!
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:33:55.112Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:34:29.630Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) SET!
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:27.808Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:40.960Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:41.809Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:50.185Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...

              Here is another cut of the log, 45 minutes later the warnings follow.

              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:04.876Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:05.201Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
              [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:05.389Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...

              I will stop the task again, I am concerned, even though a safe warning is consuming MSR processing.

              A topic that catches my attention. The action is scheduled to run on my schedule from 8:00am to 8:05am (-5), and because it is a local variable, it should not be updated outside this time, is my understanding.

              If it is a global variable, the update is recurrent, because it is active 24 hours, now why is an action with a defined time, and local variable still being executed in a loop?

              toggledbitsT 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • wmarcolinW wmarcolin

                @toggledbits hi my friend!

                The warning message has appeared again.

                5f36db72-ab37-4b81-aff7-532ede046146-image.png

                Looking at the log, it is not an error, this message appears several times intermittently, only being interrupted when another action occurs.

                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:30:35.222Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:10.561Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:10.695Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:11.054Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:12.810Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) SET!
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:22.152Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:33:15.364Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) RESET!
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:33:55.112Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:34:29.630Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) SET!
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:27.808Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:40.960Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:41.809Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:50.185Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...

                Here is another cut of the log, 45 minutes later the warnings follow.

                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:04.876Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:05.201Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:05.389Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...

                I will stop the task again, I am concerned, even though a safe warning is consuming MSR processing.

                A topic that catches my attention. The action is scheduled to run on my schedule from 8:00am to 8:05am (-5), and because it is a local variable, it should not be updated outside this time, is my understanding.

                If it is a global variable, the update is recurrent, because it is active 24 hours, now why is an action with a defined time, and local variable still being executed in a loop?

                toggledbitsT Offline
                toggledbitsT Offline
                toggledbits
                wrote on last edited by toggledbits
                #8

                @wmarcolin said in Logic loop? Throttling...:

                A topic that catches my attention. The action is scheduled to run on my schedule from 8:00am to 8:05am (-5), and because it is a local variable, it should not be updated outside this time, is my understanding.

                That's incorrect. Any changes to a watched device will cause the rule to re-evaluate. The first step in re-evaluating the rule is re-evaluating all of the rule's expressions; only after that are the conditions then evaluated, because the conditions may reference the rule's variables. This is documented behavior. So given that you may be doing a getEntity() on several dozen, or hundred, devices, you are making that rule subject to re-evaluation any time any of those devices changes, for any reason. Reactor does not "see through" to the attribute you are eventually referring to; it does not and could not (reasonably) do that.

                To reduce the evaluation rate of the rule, you'd have to make your expressions global. There is (currently) no throttling on the evaluation of global expressions, and they evaluate/update much faster than rules. I suggest you move all of your expressions that perform getEntity() on the result of matchEntities() into global expressions; specifically, I mean BatterySensor which creates the battery-operated device array, and BatteryLow which checks and evaluates (using getEntity()) the battery level of each matching device in BatterySensor, and BatteryMSG which builds the text from BatteryLow. You can then use an Expression Value condition in your rule to check the value of BatteryMSG for a non-empty string. This will be the most efficient setup for the potentially large number of devices these expressions have to sift through.

                The same method should be applied to FaultSensor and its progeny.

                I would also update to 21286.

                Author of Multi-system Reactor and Reactor, DelayLight, Switchboard, and about a dozen other plugins that run on Vera and openLuup.

                wmarcolinW 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                  @wmarcolin said in Logic loop? Throttling...:

                  A topic that catches my attention. The action is scheduled to run on my schedule from 8:00am to 8:05am (-5), and because it is a local variable, it should not be updated outside this time, is my understanding.

                  That's incorrect. Any changes to a watched device will cause the rule to re-evaluate. The first step in re-evaluating the rule is re-evaluating all of the rule's expressions; only after that are the conditions then evaluated, because the conditions may reference the rule's variables. This is documented behavior. So given that you may be doing a getEntity() on several dozen, or hundred, devices, you are making that rule subject to re-evaluation any time any of those devices changes, for any reason. Reactor does not "see through" to the attribute you are eventually referring to; it does not and could not (reasonably) do that.

                  To reduce the evaluation rate of the rule, you'd have to make your expressions global. There is (currently) no throttling on the evaluation of global expressions, and they evaluate/update much faster than rules. I suggest you move all of your expressions that perform getEntity() on the result of matchEntities() into global expressions; specifically, I mean BatterySensor which creates the battery-operated device array, and BatteryLow which checks and evaluates (using getEntity()) the battery level of each matching device in BatterySensor, and BatteryMSG which builds the text from BatteryLow. You can then use an Expression Value condition in your rule to check the value of BatteryMSG for a non-empty string. This will be the most efficient setup for the potentially large number of devices these expressions have to sift through.

                  The same method should be applied to FaultSensor and its progeny.

                  I would also update to 21286.

                  wmarcolinW Offline
                  wmarcolinW Offline
                  wmarcolin
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #9

                  @toggledbits ok master, I will download version 21286, move these expressions to global variables, and come back tomorrow after operating 24 hours with the changes.

                  I really worry about not having actions that are exhaustively generating processing.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • toggledbitsT Offline
                    toggledbitsT Offline
                    toggledbits
                    wrote on last edited by toggledbits
                    #10

                    When you train a rule or expression on a large number of devices, you're going to get activity when those devices change, and that can be a lot. There's more activity than you know, normally. Not everything gets logged at the default level. 21286 does contain a bit more logging.

                    Author of Multi-system Reactor and Reactor, DelayLight, Switchboard, and about a dozen other plugins that run on Vera and openLuup.

                    wmarcolinW 2 Replies Last reply
                    0
                    • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                      When you train a rule or expression on a large number of devices, you're going to get activity when those devices change, and that can be a lot. There's more activity than you know, normally. Not everything gets logged at the default level. 21286 does contain a bit more logging.

                      wmarcolinW Offline
                      wmarcolinW Offline
                      wmarcolin
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #11

                      @toggledbits your suggestion worked perfectly!!

                      With the version updated to 21286, moving all rules to the Global variable, the warnings ended, and I can see in the log that the action started to be invoked only at the given times, and the variable update as Global occurs only when there is an effective change in the device.

                      Great knowledge exercise and one more lesson from you.

                      Thanks @toggledbits !

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • toggledbitsT toggledbits locked this topic on
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      Recent Topics

                      • How to upgrade from an old version of MSR?
                        cw-kidC
                        cw-kid
                        0
                        12
                        200

                      • Can you run MSR on Home Assistant OS ?
                        cw-kidC
                        cw-kid
                        0
                        1
                        3

                      • HA and AI
                        PablaP
                        Pabla
                        0
                        2
                        96

                      • Self test
                        CatmanV2C
                        CatmanV2
                        0
                        3
                        84

                      • Access control - allowing anonymous user to dashboard
                        toggledbitsT
                        toggledbits
                        0
                        2
                        109

                      • VEC Virtual Switch Auto Off
                        S
                        SweetGenius
                        1
                        1
                        79

                      • Upcoming Storage Change -- Got Back-ups?
                        toggledbitsT
                        toggledbits
                        3
                        1
                        74

                      • Oddness in Copy/Move of Reactions
                        G
                        gwp1
                        0
                        1
                        91

                      • [Solved] function isRuleEnabled() issue
                        CrilleC
                        Crille
                        0
                        4
                        183

                      • [Reactor] Problem with Global Reactions and groups
                        therealdbT
                        therealdb
                        0
                        3
                        174

                      • Possible feature request 2?
                        CatmanV2C
                        CatmanV2
                        0
                        3
                        147

                      • Reactor (Multi-System/Multi-Hub) Announcements
                        toggledbitsT
                        toggledbits
                        5
                        133
                        84.3k
                      Powered by NodeBB | Contributors
                      Hosted freely by 10RUPTiV - Solutions Technologiques | Contact us
                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • Unsolved