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. [SOLVED] Will Pulse work for retrying a ruleset if the device hasn't responded as expected
Error: Command timeout
G
at _ClientAPI._commandTimeout (http://192.168.1.100:8111/client/ClientAPI.js:807:179 Seeing this randomly when returning to open browser tab after being away awhile. Once, maybe twice a day. "What did you do to trigger it?" Literally nothing, just walked away and returned and there it was. Actions taken in reasonably close proximity to this particular instance of it popping up: I'd restarted the MSR container in Portainer. I'll try to grab some logs here shortly.
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
[Solved] Local expression in Rule does not evaluate as they used to do
CrilleC
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Home Assistant 2025.11.2 and latest-25315
CrilleC
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Notice to Docker + ARM Users (RPi 3/4/5 and others)
toggledbitsT
This post does not apply to users of Intel/AMD-based systems. If you are using a Reactor image tagged latest-amd64 or stable-amd64, then this post does not apply to you. It also does not apply to bare-metal installs; it's for users of docker images on ARM-based systems only (principally Raspberry Pi hosts, but could be others). After January 15, 2026, I will no longer produce the aarch64-tagged docker image for Reactor. The ARM images will be arm64 for 64-bit operating systems, and armv7l for 32-bit operating systems. For those of you running a container from the aarch64 image today, this will be a relatively simple change: you just need to switch the image used for your docker container to a differently-tagged image. If you are using docker-compose, then this is a relatively simple matter of changing the image line in your docker-compose.yaml file and then stopping (docker-compose down) and restarting (docker-compose up -d) your Reactor daemon. But there's a catch... not all of you can safely just switch from the aarch64 image to the arm64 image. And, you can't just trust the output of uname -m, for example, because this exposes the CPU architecture, but not the word size of the OS running on that CPU. For Raspberry Pi systems, the transition to 64-bit operating systems was long (starting in 2016) and not always obvious — although there was a first "official" 64-bit OS for RPis in 2020, it did not become a default recommendation in the Raspberry Pi Imager until 2021, and then that was only the default for Pi 3/4 systems with >4GB RAM; it was 2022 before it was universally recommended for all 64-bit CPUs regardless of RAM size. Depending on when you first imaged your RPi system and what default you may have been offered/chosen, you could today easily have a 64-bit CPU Raspberry Pi running a 32-bit version of the operating system. Upgrades along the way would not change this; changing it to fully 64-bit requires a full reimage of the system. To establish if your OS is 64- or 32-bit, log in to your Pi and run: sudo dpkg-architecture -q DEB_HOST_ARCH. If the response is arm64 or aarch64, then you are running a 64-bit OS and you should use the arm64-tagged image. If it's anything else, you are running a 32-bit OS, and you should use the armv7l-tagged image. pi@rpi4-1:~ $ sudo dpkg-architecture -q DEB_HOST_ARCH armhf pi@rpi4-1:~ $ uname -m aarch64 pi@rpi4-1:~ $ In the example above, the uname command reports that the CPU is 64-bit architecture (aarch64), which is true for the host on which I ran these commands, but the DEB_HOST_ARCH value is armhf, indicating a 32-bit operating system. This system has to use the armv7l-tagged image. Other systems will have their own ways of determining the word size of the running OS. Since the majority of Reactor users running ARM systems are on Raspberry Pis, I am able to supply the above instructions, but if you happen to have a different ARM system, you'll need to do some web searching to figure out how to expose that information. Or, you can just try the arm64 image, and if it doesn't start up, try the armv7l image. Remember to always back up your system before making any changes. For everyone, please make this change as soon as possible, and if you have any trouble finding a working image, please (1) go back to the current aarch64 image; and (2) let me know in this thread along with as much detail about your host system as you can offer (including the output of the dpkg-architecture command mentioned above).
Multi-System Reactor
Requesting a proper ARM64/aarch64 Docker image (Pi 5 support)
M
Hi, I'm in the process of migrating from a Raspberry Pi 4 (ARMv7) to a Raspberry Pi 5 (ARMv8/aarch64), but I’ve run into an issue: there is no proper ARMv8/aarch64 image available. None of the existing images run on the Pi 5 - they all exit immediately with code 139 (segmentation fault), which typically indicates that the binaries inside the image are not compatible with the ARM64/aarch64 architecture used by the Pi 5. Would it be possible to publish a correct ARMv8/aarch64 (linux/arm64) image? Building one should be relatively straightforward using docker buildx with multi-arch support. For example, my own Node.js images are built this way: docker buildx build --push \ -t <localrepo>/<project>:<tag> \ --platform=linux/arm64,linux/amd64 \ --file ./apps/<project>/Dockerfile . This produces both the AMD64 and ARM64/v8 variants automatically. Also, as a side note, it may be best to avoid using Alpine as the base image for the ARM64 build, since musl-based builds often cause compatibility issues and unnecessary headaches. A glibc-based base image (e.g., Debian or Ubuntu) tends to work far more reliably on ARM64, especially for Node.js applications. @toggledbits - tagging you in case you missed this. Thanks, mgvra
Multi-System Reactor
Script action and custom timers
therealdbT
Sorry to write here without trying, but I’m flying today. Am I correct if i say that script action with alarm() makes it possible to execute a reaction in a given interval, lets say 15 seconds or 3.5 minutes? That sounds amazing, since I’ve used weird tricks, including a custom controller, just to do this.
Multi-System Reactor
Help resolve change in behaviour post update
CatmanV2C
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Reactor w/HA 2025.11 error on set_datetime service call setting only time
CrilleC
@toggledbits Do you know if this is related to that PR or is it a change they made in 2025.11.1? [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.319Z <HassController:INFO> HassController#hass perform x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_dag with { "time": "10:45" } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.320Z <HassController:INFO> HassController#hass: sending payload for x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_dag action: { "type": "call_service", "service_data": { "date": (null), "time": "10:45", "datetime": (null), "timestamp": (null) }, "domain": "input_datetime", "service": "set_datetime", "target": { "entity_id": "input_datetime.vvb_dag" } } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.321Z <HassController:ERR> HassController#hass request 1762866984320<2025-11-11 14:16:24> (call_service) failed: [Error] Not a parseable type for dictionary value @ data['date'] [-] [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.321Z <HassController:WARN> HassController#hass action x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime({ "time": "10:45" }) on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_dag failed! [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.321Z <HassController:INFO> Service call payload: {"type":"call_service","service_data":{"date":null,"time":"10:45","datetime":null,"timestamp":null},"domain":"input_datetime","service":"set_datetime","target":{"entity_id":"input_datetime.vvb_dag"},"id":1762866984320} [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.322Z <HassController:INFO> Service data: {"fields":{"date":{"example":"\"2019-04-20\"","selector":{"text":{"multiline":false,"multiple":false}}},"time":{"example":"\"05:04:20\"","selector":{"time":{}}},"datetime":{"example":"\"2019-04-20 05:04:20\"","selector":{"text":{"multiline":false,"multiple":false}}},"timestamp":{"selector":{"number":{"min":0,"max":9223372036854776000,"mode":"box","step":1}}}},"target":{"entity":[{"domain":["input_datetime"]}]}} [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.322Z <Engine:ERR> Engine#1 reaction rule-mgb8pfhs:S step 0 perform x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime failed: [Error] Not a parseable type for dictionary value @ data['date'] [-] [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.322Z <Engine:INFO> Engine#1 action args: { "time": "10:45" } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.322Z <Engine:INFO> Resuming reaction Sätt Schema VVB i Home Assistant<AKTIV> (rule-mgb8pfhs:S) from step 1 [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.323Z <HassController:INFO> HassController#hass perform x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_natt with { "time": "03:00", "timestamp": 0 } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.323Z <HassController:INFO> HassController#hass: sending payload for x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_natt action: { "type": "call_service", "service_data": { "date": (null), "time": "03:00", "datetime": (null), "timestamp": 0 }, "domain": "input_datetime", "service": "set_datetime", "target": { "entity_id": "input_datetime.vvb_natt" } } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <HassController:ERR> HassController#hass request 1762866984323<2025-11-11 14:16:24> (call_service) failed: [Error] Not a parseable type for dictionary value @ data['date'] [-] [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <HassController:WARN> HassController#hass action x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime({ "time": "03:00", "timestamp": 0 }) on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_natt failed! [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <HassController:INFO> Service call payload: {"type":"call_service","service_data":{"date":null,"time":"03:00","datetime":null,"timestamp":0},"domain":"input_datetime","service":"set_datetime","target":{"entity_id":"input_datetime.vvb_natt"},"id":1762866984323} [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <HassController:INFO> Service data: {"fields":{"date":{"example":"\"2019-04-20\"","selector":{"text":{"multiline":false,"multiple":false}}},"time":{"example":"\"05:04:20\"","selector":{"time":{}}},"datetime":{"example":"\"2019-04-20 05:04:20\"","selector":{"text":{"multiline":false,"multiple":false}}},"timestamp":{"selector":{"number":{"min":0,"max":9223372036854776000,"mode":"box","step":1}}}},"target":{"entity":[{"domain":["input_datetime"]}]}} [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <Engine:ERR> Engine#1 reaction rule-mgb8pfhs:S step 1 perform x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime failed: [Error] Not a parseable type for dictionary value @ data['date'] [-] [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <Engine:INFO> Engine#1 action args: { "time": "03:00", "timestamp": 0 } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.325Z <Engine:INFO> Resuming reaction Sätt Schema VVB i Home Assistant<AKTIV> (rule-mgb8pfhs:S) from step 2 [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.325Z <Engine:INFO> Sätt Schema VVB i Home Assistant<AKTIV> all actions completed.
Multi-System Reactor
Reactor Version 25310 : Office Light control via rule in reactor no longer working since last update.
P
Hello, I currently have an office light (connected via a Leviton Zwave Dimmer switch) controlled from a Gen5 Aeotech Zwave switch installed on my Synology 720+ NAS. I run HA(2025.11.10) in a virtual machine from my NAS and Reactor on the container manager of the same NAS. Prior to updating to 25304 the rule I had set to turn the light on to a specific dimming value worked correctly. Now the rule appears to follow the decision tree, however the reaction does not trigger setting the dimming or turning on the office light? Strangely I can still turn the light on and off as well as dim it directly from HASS..? I have tried using the ''try this action'' button in the rules reaction setting and it will not control the light and does not throw an error flagÉ Please help, P.S Reactor has been rock steady for me over the last few years and I'm a big fan of this solution.
Multi-System Reactor
[Solved] alarm() in global expression throws error in log.
CrilleC
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[Solved] Define function issue in latest-25304
CrilleC
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
No Upgrade Notification for Build 25308?
CatmanV2C
FWIW I'm no longer getting a notification from MSR that there's an update. Just thought I'd mention it C
Multi-System Reactor
Strange behavior in MSR latest-25304 with disabled groups in Reaction
therealdbT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[Reactor] Variables not updating correctly in latest-25201-2aa18550
therealdbT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
The reaction stopped working (Google Nest max playing a video)
F
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Handling Dead Entities and Renamed Entities
PablaP
Hello all.. been a minute! I recently rebuilt my Z wave network and migrated to a new z wave stick. In order to prevent any downtime I kept my original z wave network up and ran a docker version of Z Wave JS UI with my new controller. This way I could add device by device without having any devices down. I finally moved all the devices over to my new stick today. The final step was to migrate everything from my Docker instance of Z Wave JS UI to the HA add-on of Z Wave JS UI. However during this migration some of the names didn't populate correctly which I later managed to import back into Z Wave JS UI. The issue was in Reactor it is stuck on the default names and the entities are not updating. I removed the controller from Reactor, restarted, hard refreshed, and added the controller back however the new entity names have not updated. Also it seems like the old entities from my previous instance of Z Wave JS UI are lingering and not being marked as dead (I believe a certain amount of time needs to lapse before they're marked as dead in Reactor). My goal is to basically purge all the entities for the 'ZWaveJS' controller in Reactor so it can pull all the updated entity names and only the entities that exist in Z Wave JS UI. I cannot find a quick way to do this, I know entities can be deleted one by one, but with over 100 entities this would take long I am guessing that if I added the controller with a new name in in the Reactor config it would pull the updated entities and names but I think that would break my rules since the entity IDs would change (I made sure to name all the entities the exact same as they were previously to prevent this issue).
Multi-System Reactor
Strange behavior for MQTT templates using payload and attributes
therealdbT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[MSR] reactor-mqtt-contrib package for additional MQTT templates
therealdbT
I'm slowly migrating all my stuff to MQTT under MSR, so I have a central place to integrate everything (and, in a not-so-distant future, to remove virtual devices from my Vera and leave it running zwave only). Anyway, here's my reactor-mqtt-contrib package: https://github.com/dbochicchio/reactor-mqtt-contrib Simply download yaml files (everything or just the ones you need) and you're good to go. I have mapped my most useful devices, but I'll add others soon. Feel free to ask for specific templates, since I've worked a lot in the last weeks to understand and operate them. The templates are supporting both init and query, so you have always up-to-date devices at startup, and the ability to poll them. Online status is supported as well, so you can get disconnected devices with a simple expression. Many-many thanks to @toggledbits for its dedication, support, and patience with me and my requests
Multi-System Reactor
HA 2025.9.4 Supported Yet?
CatmanV2C
Tangentially did I miss 2025.9.4 getting blessed in MSR? I've been holding off Cheers C
Multi-System Reactor

[SOLVED] Will Pulse work for retrying a ruleset if the device hasn't responded as expected

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Multi-System Reactor
26 Posts 2 Posters 4.4k 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 toggledbits

    It depends and when and how you are doing this. After doing a lot of editing, and in particular where you may be saving along the way as you make changes, things can get into states that they would not be in once the logic edits are finished and all the timing options are applied. That's why there's a "reset" button for the rule... to clear out all the state and start it fresh. Recommended.

    G Offline
    G Offline
    gwp1
    wrote on last edited by gwp1
    #6

    @toggledbits I think i figured it out AND something else to boot.

    So to the ask above, I happened to catch it running this morning. I'm used to basing on "if the thing should be true but it's false" in my trigger AND doing so at the individual condition level (vs group which you recommended I try - and I have.) Setting at the group level means the status timer shows in the group bar, not at the individual condition level like I was used to.

    Now on to something I did notice that is, in reality, the reason it appears like this isn't working...

    My scenario:
    Multiple HVAC rulesets per mode, ie Heat sans Night, Heat at Night, Neutral, Cooling sans Night, Cooling at Night. Three Arm For rulesets drive which one should be sending to the Honeywell API based on outdoor temps from the wx station. Works like a champ.

    The course correction rulesets, however, don't turn on and off - they're constantly looking to see if the conditions are met or not, even if that mode isn't the active one. Example, the Neutral correction ruleset is still "running" even if the house is actually in Heating sans Night.

    The pulse is to provide back-up to the initial correction because sometimes Honeywell just isn't ready yet when the correction first runs. Works brilliantly... except, I've noticed that the pulse is just continuing to run if I leave it at 0 (as expected, unmetered retries). I can set it to a count, that's fine - but the count runs out due to running even when that mode isn't active creating a scenario wherein there are no more pulses/retries when that mode IS active.

    THIS is why it appears not to be working - it's run itself out even when not on active duty, if you will.

    This is the Neutral correction ruleset. Right now the house is in Heating sans Night because Arm For Heating is active, Arm For Neutral and Arm For Cooling are not. You'll see the conditions set to true are correct, the temps are not 58 - obviously, because the heat is set to 68 downstairs, 65 upstairs. However, this is making the correction ruleset run unnecessarily which, if my thinking is right, means it's wasting CPU/memory/etc. and may be hitting the API (though I've seen no burst of green around the ruleset to show me it is running.)

    Untitled.png

    Make sense?

    *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.158
    *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

    *HASS 2025.11.1
    w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
    FW: v1.1
    SDK: v7.23.1

    *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
    MSR: latest-25323-d340b7d9
    MQTTController: 25139
    ZWave Controller: 25139

    toggledbitsT 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • G gwp1

      @toggledbits I think i figured it out AND something else to boot.

      So to the ask above, I happened to catch it running this morning. I'm used to basing on "if the thing should be true but it's false" in my trigger AND doing so at the individual condition level (vs group which you recommended I try - and I have.) Setting at the group level means the status timer shows in the group bar, not at the individual condition level like I was used to.

      Now on to something I did notice that is, in reality, the reason it appears like this isn't working...

      My scenario:
      Multiple HVAC rulesets per mode, ie Heat sans Night, Heat at Night, Neutral, Cooling sans Night, Cooling at Night. Three Arm For rulesets drive which one should be sending to the Honeywell API based on outdoor temps from the wx station. Works like a champ.

      The course correction rulesets, however, don't turn on and off - they're constantly looking to see if the conditions are met or not, even if that mode isn't the active one. Example, the Neutral correction ruleset is still "running" even if the house is actually in Heating sans Night.

      The pulse is to provide back-up to the initial correction because sometimes Honeywell just isn't ready yet when the correction first runs. Works brilliantly... except, I've noticed that the pulse is just continuing to run if I leave it at 0 (as expected, unmetered retries). I can set it to a count, that's fine - but the count runs out due to running even when that mode isn't active creating a scenario wherein there are no more pulses/retries when that mode IS active.

      THIS is why it appears not to be working - it's run itself out even when not on active duty, if you will.

      This is the Neutral correction ruleset. Right now the house is in Heating sans Night because Arm For Heating is active, Arm For Neutral and Arm For Cooling are not. You'll see the conditions set to true are correct, the temps are not 58 - obviously, because the heat is set to 68 downstairs, 65 upstairs. However, this is making the correction ruleset run unnecessarily which, if my thinking is right, means it's wasting CPU/memory/etc. and may be hitting the API (though I've seen no burst of green around the ruleset to show me it is running.)

      Untitled.png

      Make sense?

      toggledbitsT Offline
      toggledbitsT Offline
      toggledbits
      wrote on last edited by
      #7

      @gwp1 said in Will Pulse work for retrying a ruleset if the device hasn't responded as expected:

      Make sense?

      Not a bit. Sorry. What am I look at/for?

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

      G 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • toggledbitsT toggledbits

        @gwp1 said in Will Pulse work for retrying a ruleset if the device hasn't responded as expected:

        Make sense?

        Not a bit. Sorry. What am I look at/for?

        G Offline
        G Offline
        gwp1
        wrote on last edited by
        #8

        @toggledbits I guess first thing, am I correct in that the pulse running on the rulesets is wasting system resources if those rulesets aren't "eligible" for running?

        Trying to think how to rephrase this... ALL of the correction rulesets are running all the time if I implement 0 pulse. If I implement metered pulse then they run themselves out and when they're needed they're already done.

        These are the Arm For rulesets:

        1.png

        Only one "runs" at a time, obviously, triggering one of these rulesets:

        1a.png

        If, due to the aforemented API hit-or-miss sometimes, one of these runs but doesn't get accepted by the API then the appropriate correction runs:

        2.png

        My issue seems to be that all of the corrections are running all of the time if I enable pulse at 0. If I meter the pulse then they run X times and are done - and when the time comes for them to really run, they're spent already.

        If the pulse running isn't putting an unnecessary load on the system, then I'll set them to 0 and leave it be. So... are they?

        *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.158
        *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

        *HASS 2025.11.1
        w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
        FW: v1.1
        SDK: v7.23.1

        *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
        MSR: latest-25323-d340b7d9
        MQTTController: 25139
        ZWave Controller: 25139

        toggledbitsT 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • G gwp1

          @toggledbits I guess first thing, am I correct in that the pulse running on the rulesets is wasting system resources if those rulesets aren't "eligible" for running?

          Trying to think how to rephrase this... ALL of the correction rulesets are running all the time if I implement 0 pulse. If I implement metered pulse then they run themselves out and when they're needed they're already done.

          These are the Arm For rulesets:

          1.png

          Only one "runs" at a time, obviously, triggering one of these rulesets:

          1a.png

          If, due to the aforemented API hit-or-miss sometimes, one of these runs but doesn't get accepted by the API then the appropriate correction runs:

          2.png

          My issue seems to be that all of the corrections are running all of the time if I enable pulse at 0. If I meter the pulse then they run X times and are done - and when the time comes for them to really run, they're spent already.

          If the pulse running isn't putting an unnecessary load on the system, then I'll set them to 0 and leave it be. So... are they?

          toggledbitsT Offline
          toggledbitsT Offline
          toggledbits
          wrote on last edited by
          #9

          @gwp1 said in Will Pulse work for retrying a ruleset if the device hasn't responded as expected:

          I guess first thing, am I correct in that the pulse running on the rulesets is wasting system resources if those rulesets aren't "eligible" for running?

          No. That's not the case. Unless the underlying condition is true, no pulse train is running. Nothing is happening. I come from the days of room-filling million-dollar computers with 256K (yes, K) of RAM. I don't like wasted cycles. 🙂

          What is true is that whatever the state of the current pulse may be when it is active is not changed by you editing the rules/condition options at the same time. It is not until the current pulse expires that your new pulse rules will take effect. So if you have a condition that is active right now in the middle of a 120 second pulse, and you edit the timing down to 15 seconds, that 120 second pulse is going to finish; it will not be cut short, it will not stop. When it finishes, the next pulse after will be on your new timing. Likewise, if it's timing a break and the underlying condition is still true, the break timing will finish.

          This is why I say, you have to reset the rule after editing it. Your earlier screen shot clearly shows a condition where you edited in the middle of a 120 second pulse break, going from 0 repeats back to 3, and the 120 second pulse break timer is still running. The rule reset function is provided for exactly this circumstance -- to dump existing states and timers. If you don't do the reset, you're going to see really confusing results as Reactor finishes what it was doing before it starts to follow your new instructions.

          And if the pulse is "running all the time" then there is a true state on your logic to make it do that. It does not run otherwise.

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

          G 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • toggledbitsT toggledbits

            @gwp1 said in Will Pulse work for retrying a ruleset if the device hasn't responded as expected:

            I guess first thing, am I correct in that the pulse running on the rulesets is wasting system resources if those rulesets aren't "eligible" for running?

            No. That's not the case. Unless the underlying condition is true, no pulse train is running. Nothing is happening. I come from the days of room-filling million-dollar computers with 256K (yes, K) of RAM. I don't like wasted cycles. 🙂

            What is true is that whatever the state of the current pulse may be when it is active is not changed by you editing the rules/condition options at the same time. It is not until the current pulse expires that your new pulse rules will take effect. So if you have a condition that is active right now in the middle of a 120 second pulse, and you edit the timing down to 15 seconds, that 120 second pulse is going to finish; it will not be cut short, it will not stop. When it finishes, the next pulse after will be on your new timing. Likewise, if it's timing a break and the underlying condition is still true, the break timing will finish.

            This is why I say, you have to reset the rule after editing it. Your earlier screen shot clearly shows a condition where you edited in the middle of a 120 second pulse break, going from 0 repeats back to 3, and the 120 second pulse break timer is still running. The rule reset function is provided for exactly this circumstance -- to dump existing states and timers. If you don't do the reset, you're going to see really confusing results as Reactor finishes what it was doing before it starts to follow your new instructions.

            And if the pulse is "running all the time" then there is a true state on your logic to make it do that. It does not run otherwise.

            G Offline
            G Offline
            gwp1
            wrote on last edited by
            #10

            @toggledbits The first sentence I can totally wrap my head around 🙂

            The last sentence is what's driving this. If you look at the correction ruleset you'll see it's kinda backward from normal in that the trigger is when something is NOT a certain temp or HVAC mode. This results in it always being in a true state as other rulesets are in effect.

            Different words:
            When Heating or Cooling rulesets are controlling things, Neutral correction shows true - because it is. This results in pulse always running (or, if metered, running out of retries.)

            *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.158
            *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

            *HASS 2025.11.1
            w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
            FW: v1.1
            SDK: v7.23.1

            *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
            MSR: latest-25323-d340b7d9
            MQTTController: 25139
            ZWave Controller: 25139

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • toggledbitsT Offline
              toggledbitsT Offline
              toggledbits
              wrote on last edited by
              #11

              I see what you're getting at. That's simply a problem with your condition structure. The inner groups can't know how any enclosing groups are going to interpret their output, so of course the pulses run, as well they should -- you've told them to. If that's not what you want, a slight restructure of your logic fixes that.

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

              G 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                I see what you're getting at. That's simply a problem with your condition structure. The inner groups can't know how any enclosing groups are going to interpret their output, so of course the pulses run, as well they should -- you've told them to. If that's not what you want, a slight restructure of your logic fixes that.

                G Offline
                G Offline
                gwp1
                wrote on last edited by
                #12

                @toggledbits Def not what I want but it's the direct path. "If after running Neutral the conditions don't match, run the correction."

                *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.158
                *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                *HASS 2025.11.1
                w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                FW: v1.1
                SDK: v7.23.1

                *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                MSR: latest-25323-d340b7d9
                MQTTController: 25139
                ZWave Controller: 25139

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • toggledbitsT Offline
                  toggledbitsT Offline
                  toggledbits
                  wrote on last edited by toggledbits
                  #13

                  @gwp1 said in Will Pulse work for retrying a ruleset if the device hasn't responded as expected:

                  Def not what I want but it's the direct path. "If after running Neutral the conditions don't match, run the correction."

                  I'm not sure what that means.

                  I think all you need to do is create an enclosing group, put all of the conditions/subgroups, including the Rule State condition, into it, and then move the pulse configuration to that upper enclosing group, removing it from the interior groups. The Rule State condition will then gate the pulse train.

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

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                    I see what you're getting at. That's simply a problem with your condition structure. The inner groups can't know how any enclosing groups are going to interpret their output, so of course the pulses run, as well they should -- you've told them to. If that's not what you want, a slight restructure of your logic fixes that.

                    G Offline
                    G Offline
                    gwp1
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #14

                    @toggledbits So this took a major rewrite, esp for the Neutral because you could be going from Heat to Neutral, from Cooling to Neutral, and back again. The goal here, now, is to have it so that something must go true and there are far more options to cover than triggering on something going false. This is what I've arrived at - a second+ set of eyes on my work would be appreciated.

                    new.png

                    new2.png

                    I stared at it 'til I'm cross-eyed!

                    *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.158
                    *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                    *HASS 2025.11.1
                    w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                    FW: v1.1
                    SDK: v7.23.1

                    *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                    MSR: latest-25323-d340b7d9
                    MQTTController: 25139
                    ZWave Controller: 25139

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • toggledbitsT Offline
                      toggledbitsT Offline
                      toggledbits
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #15

                      I'm thinking still not right. The group with the pulse output needs to be a wrapper group for EVERYTHING else, including the Rule State condition, to my way of looking at it.

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

                      G 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                        I'm thinking still not right. The group with the pulse output needs to be a wrapper group for EVERYTHING else, including the Rule State condition, to my way of looking at it.

                        G Offline
                        G Offline
                        gwp1
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #16

                        @toggledbits Like this:

                        new3.png

                        What's the reasoning behind bumping that up one more level?

                        *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.158
                        *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                        *HASS 2025.11.1
                        w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                        FW: v1.1
                        SDK: v7.23.1

                        *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                        MSR: latest-25323-d340b7d9
                        MQTTController: 25139
                        ZWave Controller: 25139

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • toggledbitsT Offline
                          toggledbitsT Offline
                          toggledbits
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #17

                          Yes, I think this is closer to what you really want. This keeps the pulses from firing unless the Rule State condition is also true, so that you can (again) use the limited count of pulses, because pulses won't be firing unless all of the conditions AND the rule state are all true. That is, pulses will only happen when the devices aren't set properly for "Neutral" (for a while) and Neutral is the active mode.

                          You also have to think about your "sustained for" timing. That is also done in the interior, meaning it is done irrespective of whether the Neutral mode is active or not, and that, too, is probably not what you want. The effect is that your correction will fire immediately if the Neutral conditions haven't been met for a while at the time the system is switched into Neutral mode. I imagine you actually want a delay there, since it probably takes a couple of seconds for the transition into Neutral mode to make the round trip through the cloud and devices and be reported back. You need to give it a chance to work/catch up. A simple fix there is to simply add a sustained for delay to the Rule State (is Neutral active) condition, so your logic overall becomes "if the mode has been Neutral for at least 300 seconds and the devices haven't been set properly for at least 300 seconds".

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

                          G 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                            Yes, I think this is closer to what you really want. This keeps the pulses from firing unless the Rule State condition is also true, so that you can (again) use the limited count of pulses, because pulses won't be firing unless all of the conditions AND the rule state are all true. That is, pulses will only happen when the devices aren't set properly for "Neutral" (for a while) and Neutral is the active mode.

                            You also have to think about your "sustained for" timing. That is also done in the interior, meaning it is done irrespective of whether the Neutral mode is active or not, and that, too, is probably not what you want. The effect is that your correction will fire immediately if the Neutral conditions haven't been met for a while at the time the system is switched into Neutral mode. I imagine you actually want a delay there, since it probably takes a couple of seconds for the transition into Neutral mode to make the round trip through the cloud and devices and be reported back. You need to give it a chance to work/catch up. A simple fix there is to simply add a sustained for delay to the Rule State (is Neutral active) condition, so your logic overall becomes "if the mode has been Neutral for at least 300 seconds and the devices haven't been set properly for at least 300 seconds".

                            G Offline
                            G Offline
                            gwp1
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #18

                            @toggledbits HA, funny you bring that last part up because the sun has gone down so the system races thru Neutral to Heating as the temps drop quickly. I did notice the 300 seconds was being ignored, seemingly, and the correction fired on the heels of the change.

                            I did move the 300 seconds up to the next group level. Since UP and Down both are sub-groups within the larger group I thought it made sense to raise that a level - do correct me if I'm wrong here.

                            Looking into the tweak you noted in your response.

                            *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.158
                            *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                            *HASS 2025.11.1
                            w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                            FW: v1.1
                            SDK: v7.23.1

                            *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                            MSR: latest-25323-d340b7d9
                            MQTTController: 25139
                            ZWave Controller: 25139

                            toggledbitsT 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • G gwp1

                              @toggledbits HA, funny you bring that last part up because the sun has gone down so the system races thru Neutral to Heating as the temps drop quickly. I did notice the 300 seconds was being ignored, seemingly, and the correction fired on the heels of the change.

                              I did move the 300 seconds up to the next group level. Since UP and Down both are sub-groups within the larger group I thought it made sense to raise that a level - do correct me if I'm wrong here.

                              Looking into the tweak you noted in your response.

                              toggledbitsT Offline
                              toggledbitsT Offline
                              toggledbits
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #19

                              @gwp1 said in Will Pulse work for retrying a ruleset if the device hasn't responded as expected:

                              I thought it made sense to raise that a level - do correct me if I'm wrong here.

                              This is a good rule of thumb. Well done!

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

                              G 1 Reply Last reply
                              1
                              • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                                @gwp1 said in Will Pulse work for retrying a ruleset if the device hasn't responded as expected:

                                I thought it made sense to raise that a level - do correct me if I'm wrong here.

                                This is a good rule of thumb. Well done!

                                G Offline
                                G Offline
                                gwp1
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #20

                                @toggledbits QQ, all of these 300 second sustains... they're working concurrently, not consecutively, yes?

                                *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.158
                                *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                                *HASS 2025.11.1
                                w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                                FW: v1.1
                                SDK: v7.23.1

                                *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                                MSR: latest-25323-d340b7d9
                                MQTTController: 25139
                                ZWave Controller: 25139

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • toggledbitsT Offline
                                  toggledbitsT Offline
                                  toggledbits
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #21

                                  They can -- it depends on when their respective conditions get them rolling...

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

                                  G 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                                    They can -- it depends on when their respective conditions get them rolling...

                                    G Offline
                                    G Offline
                                    gwp1
                                    wrote on last edited by gwp1
                                    #22

                                    @toggledbits Before heading off to sleep the house slips into "night" mode. One stat, the upstairs one, did not change to night temp so I came in to watch the correction happen.

                                    It didn't. No sustained for timers rolling, nothing.

                                    I moved the Sustained for 300s back down to the next group level, that of the Up and Down t-stat level and the sustained for timer showed up. #win

                                    When I hit reset the rule state for Arm for Heating started its sustained for timer as expected. So did the timer for down which makes sense because it is the stat that didn't come along.

                                    And then when the 300 seconds ran out... nothing. Nothing happened. Even the highest level pulse didn't... pulse.

                                    Screen Shot 2021-12-14 at 10.48.11 PM.png

                                    Up is still wrong and nothing looks like it's running to correct it. I'm wondering if moving the pulse to the top-most level isn't working. I can't see why not - but I don't know why the sustained for timers didn't go at one level higher, either.

                                    Update: those moves didn't help, when the timers ran out the AND Upstairs for at least 300 secs [or] bar blinked and... no reaction ran.

                                    *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.158
                                    *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                                    *HASS 2025.11.1
                                    w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                                    FW: v1.1
                                    SDK: v7.23.1

                                    *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                                    MSR: latest-25323-d340b7d9
                                    MQTTController: 25139
                                    ZWave Controller: 25139

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • toggledbitsT Offline
                                      toggledbitsT Offline
                                      toggledbits
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #23

                                      Stats is in AND mode, so both Upstairs and Downstairs need to be true at the same time. Is that intended?

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

                                      G 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                                        Stats is in AND mode, so both Upstairs and Downstairs need to be true at the same time. Is that intended?

                                        G Offline
                                        G Offline
                                        gwp1
                                        wrote on last edited by gwp1
                                        #24

                                        @toggledbits Wow, great catch. There's also another error in this one where statmode and setpoints should be AND, not OR. I think this got bolluxed when I started moving groups into groups into groups.

                                        Quick review of the other rulesets and I see a couple more of these here and there including one that I was trying to test/troubleshoot just this morning.

                                        Nice catch - appreciate it! Now I'll validate these work again and then, one by one, make the pulse and sustained for edits back up to higher levels.

                                        *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.158
                                        *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                                        *HASS 2025.11.1
                                        w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                                        FW: v1.1
                                        SDK: v7.23.1

                                        *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                                        MSR: latest-25323-d340b7d9
                                        MQTTController: 25139
                                        ZWave Controller: 25139

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • toggledbitsT Offline
                                          toggledbitsT Offline
                                          toggledbits
                                          wrote on last edited by toggledbits
                                          #25

                                          Remember to give those status lines a good hard squiz. I still don't understand your logic completely, but when you said you expected pulses to be rolling, and the top interior group was not true while an interior group was true (and that was correct/expected, as you also pointed out), that was the clue to make me ask about the operation on the group. Follow your groups up from where they are as expected to where they are not, and check those operators! 🙂

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

                                          G 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          Recent Topics

                                          • Error: Command timeout
                                            G
                                            gwp1
                                            0
                                            6
                                            91

                                          • Reactor (Multi-System/Multi-Hub) Announcements
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            5
                                            131
                                            74.5k

                                          • [Solved] Local expression in Rule does not evaluate as they used to do
                                            CrilleC
                                            Crille
                                            0
                                            5
                                            179

                                          • Home Assistant 2025.11.2 and latest-25315
                                            G
                                            gwp1
                                            0
                                            6
                                            210

                                          • Notice to Docker + ARM Users (RPi 3/4/5 and others)
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            1
                                            1
                                            71

                                          • Requesting a proper ARM64/aarch64 Docker image (Pi 5 support)
                                            M
                                            mgvra
                                            1
                                            3
                                            168

                                          • Script action and custom timers
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            0
                                            4
                                            183

                                          • Help resolve change in behaviour post update
                                            CatmanV2C
                                            CatmanV2
                                            0
                                            12
                                            484

                                          • There is an alternative to homebridge-mqttthing
                                            akbooerA
                                            akbooer
                                            1
                                            2
                                            146

                                          • Reactor w/HA 2025.11 error on set_datetime service call setting only time
                                            CrilleC
                                            Crille
                                            0
                                            6
                                            219

                                          • Reactor Version 25310 : Office Light control via rule in reactor no longer working since last update.
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            0
                                            17
                                            616

                                          • Shelly Wall Display XL
                                            akbooerA
                                            akbooer
                                            2
                                            9
                                            904
                                          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