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. Low-priority GUI feedback
[Solved] Local expression in Rule does not evaluate as they used to do
CrilleC
Topic thumbnail image
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
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
Rule Set UI bug - RESOLVED
3
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor

Low-priority GUI feedback

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Multi-System Reactor
53 Posts 6 Posters 9.2k Views 6 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.
  • LibraSunL Offline
    LibraSunL Offline
    LibraSun
    wrote on last edited by LibraSun
    #28

    @toggledbits here on the Scope screen, one marvels at MSR's extreme precision! :-0

    scope_precision.png

    scope_precision.png

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • LibraSunL Offline
      LibraSunL Offline
      LibraSun
      wrote on last edited by
      #29

      @toggledbits I just happened to catch a glimpse, in Rule Sets with one of my Rules expanded, of the countdown displaying:
      false as of 13:23:58 waiting 0-0:00:03 // then 0-0:00:02, then 0-0:00:01 I believe...
      instead of just:
      false as of 13:23:58 waiting 0:00:01 02, 03, etc.
      The extra '0-` bit disappeared after a few seconds, and only happened at the beginning of the count. (My constraint condition is supposed to be true for 60 seconds, and I was specifically watching it to monitor progress.)

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • LibraSunL Offline
        LibraSunL Offline
        LibraSun
        wrote on last edited by
        #30

        @toggledbits Nice touch allowing the Expression definition cells to be persistently resized. Really helps with large "Objects".
        Also just noticing the A-Z sort button atop Rule Sets, which I haven't used yet, but that's a nice touch! New to 21096 or just me not noticing before?

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • toggledbitsT Offline
          toggledbitsT Offline
          toggledbits
          wrote on last edited by
          #31

          They're not really persistently resized, it's just taking a guess at the size needed based on the number of newlines, but wrapping of very long lines will probably goof it up. But, better than not doing it.

          A-Z has been around for a very long time...

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

          LibraSunL 1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • toggledbitsT toggledbits

            They're not really persistently resized, it's just taking a guess at the size needed based on the number of newlines, but wrapping of very long lines will probably goof it up. But, better than not doing it.

            A-Z has been around for a very long time...

            LibraSunL Offline
            LibraSunL Offline
            LibraSun
            wrote on last edited by LibraSun
            #32

            @toggledbits said in Low-priority GUI feedback:

            A-Z has been around for a very long time...

            One thing that I do believe changed with the release of 21096 is that Rule Sets now resets to the topmost ruleset on each visit. Not sure that's a positive development...?

            With about 20 Rule Sets, while editing a particular group (say "HVAC"), I may jump back and forth to Entities, Expressions, Scope, etc. then back to "HVAC".

            Now, Rule Sets always snaps back to "Assistants" (that is, label nearest "A" -- I keep them alphabetically sorted). Do you have any user feedback to support that behavior? (I can live with it; it's just extra mouse clicks, lol) If not, I vote "go back to 'LastSelectedRuleset'". 🙂

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • LibraSunL Offline
              LibraSunL Offline
              LibraSun
              wrote on last edited by
              #33

              IMPORTANT @toggledbits -- I wanted you to bask in this PR-free day, so am asking in the Forum instead:
              If Rule A has nothing in the Set Reaction, I've noticed that it does not "trip" or "trigger" despite the Conditions being met. Consequently, another Rule B failed to execute with its otherwise automatic [Rule State] [Rule A Set] being true.

              Any immediate thoughts on this? And would my immediate "fix" be to include at least a "Comment" in Rule A's Set Reaction?

              I know this is an edge case, but I have several rules like Rule A all grouped together, half with nothing in Set (almost as "placeholders" for when I think of actual stuff I want them to do).

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • toggledbitsT Offline
                toggledbitsT Offline
                toggledbits
                wrote on last edited by
                #34

                I have tons of rules with no reactions. The setting and saving of the rule state is also quite separate in the code from the point where the reaction is selected and started (or not).

                Anything logged?

                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
                1
                • LibraSunL Offline
                  LibraSunL Offline
                  LibraSun
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #35

                  Nope, nothing logged, leaving me to believe it's the underlying trigger mechanism - a Yale Assure deadbolt - is letting me down. Thanks for confirming, though, so I know which rabbit hole to go down tomorrow.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • toggledbitsT Offline
                    toggledbitsT Offline
                    toggledbits
                    wrote on last edited by toggledbits
                    #36

                    If your Rule logging level is 5, there should be sufficient info in the logs for you to see "entity-changed" entries like this:

                    2021-04-09T01:55:23.325Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:466> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9 dependency notification entity-changed Entity#house>device_6 from Entity#house>device_6
                    2021-04-09T01:55:23.325Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:479> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9 requesting eval; entity-changed Entity#house>device_6
                    

                    That will be followed by (possibly with stuff between):

                    2021-04-09T01:55:23.325Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:814> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9 (Auto Fan On) evaluate() acquiring mutex
                    2021-04-09T01:55:23.326Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:820> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9._evaluate() mutex acquired, evaluating
                    

                    This indicates that the rule is setting up for evaluation (making sure it's not already doing an evaluation). Then:

                    2021-04-09T01:55:23.326Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:668> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9 evaluateExpressions() with 0 expressions
                    2021-04-09T01:55:23.326Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:863> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9._evaluate() trigger state now false (was false)
                    2021-04-09T01:55:23.326Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:871> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9._evaluate() constraints state true
                    2021-04-09T01:55:23.326Z <Rule:null> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9 rule state now false, changed no
                    

                    The first of these lines indicates the number of expressions being evaluated, which is the first phase of rule evaluation. The next line follows the evaluation of the trigger conditions and gives the new trigger state and the prior state. The line that follows is the evaluation result of the constraints. The fourth line states the overall rule state, and if that's different from the prior rule state. It is after this last line that the reaction to run is chosen (it is only run if the rule state changed as shown in the last log entry).

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

                    LibraSunL 1 Reply Last reply
                    1
                    • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                      If your Rule logging level is 5, there should be sufficient info in the logs for you to see "entity-changed" entries like this:

                      2021-04-09T01:55:23.325Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:466> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9 dependency notification entity-changed Entity#house>device_6 from Entity#house>device_6
                      2021-04-09T01:55:23.325Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:479> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9 requesting eval; entity-changed Entity#house>device_6
                      

                      That will be followed by (possibly with stuff between):

                      2021-04-09T01:55:23.325Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:814> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9 (Auto Fan On) evaluate() acquiring mutex
                      2021-04-09T01:55:23.326Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:820> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9._evaluate() mutex acquired, evaluating
                      

                      This indicates that the rule is setting up for evaluation (making sure it's not already doing an evaluation). Then:

                      2021-04-09T01:55:23.326Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:668> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9 evaluateExpressions() with 0 expressions
                      2021-04-09T01:55:23.326Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:863> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9._evaluate() trigger state now false (was false)
                      2021-04-09T01:55:23.326Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:871> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9._evaluate() constraints state true
                      2021-04-09T01:55:23.326Z <Rule:null> Rule#rule-grpwswz9u9 rule state now false, changed no
                      

                      The first of these lines indicates the number of expressions being evaluated, which is the first phase of rule evaluation. The next line follows the evaluation of the trigger conditions and gives the new trigger state and the prior state. The line that follows is the evaluation result of the constraints. The fourth line states the overall rule state, and if that's different from the prior rule state. It is after this last line that the reaction to run is chosen (it is only run if the rule state changed as shown in the last log entry).

                      LibraSunL Offline
                      LibraSunL Offline
                      LibraSun
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #37

                      Yup, it was the lock's fault. Seems to have significant lag sending over the "unlocked" status, so my Triggers got out of sync. Fixed!

                      Relieved to know that "empty" Rules are both permitted and normal.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • toggledbitsT Offline
                        toggledbitsT Offline
                        toggledbits
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #38

                        It has to be, otherwise you would not be able to easily use them as building blocks for other rules. I do this extensively.

                        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
                        1
                        • LibraSunL Offline
                          LibraSunL Offline
                          LibraSun
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #39

                          @toggledbits okay, I am ready to formalize this feature request:

                          Would you consider allowing the run reaction action to allow free form text entry, in such a way that you could still use the drop-down list of reactions, but you could also enter the canonical Rule ID either directly as a text string or via substitution?
                          I can see why you may not want to do this since it introduces the possibility of typographical errors.
                          The reason I'm asking is that I may want to set up a rule that acts as sort of a "director" that runs other rules based on a lookup. Of course I can currently do it in the reverse direction where those rules simply run based on the output value and that's that.

                          Thoughts?

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • LibraSunL Offline
                            LibraSunL Offline
                            LibraSun
                            wrote on last edited by LibraSun
                            #40

                            FEEDBACK @toggledbits Note how objects with "text" keys get sorted in "Last Value:" according to "numbers first then letters" (i.e. dictionary style) rather than the order in which keys appear in the Object declaration.
                            objects_sorted.png

                            Probably not bothering most users, but could mildly disrupt workflow of someone who routinely copies "Last Value:" for Pretty Print purposes. I know I'd prefer original order.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • toggledbitsT Offline
                              toggledbitsT Offline
                              toggledbits
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #41

                              Object properties (dictionary keys) do not have a deterministic or guaranteed order in JavaScript.

                              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
                              1
                              • LibraSunL Offline
                                LibraSunL Offline
                                LibraSun
                                wrote on last edited by LibraSun
                                #42

                                UPDATE: Seemingly resolved. Trivial. I added a "hold true for 2 seconds" on Trigger condition, the wait apparently needed in order for "turn ON" event (in Constraints) to be recognized on Vera. Funny, too, because that's the 1st action Alexa's routine issues. Lessons learned: (1) MSR's idea of synchrony is not always the same as my own; and, (2) Alexa may stutter when executing successive steps in Routines (WOW! Noticing gaps of up to 7 seconds here, sometimes Step 1 precedes Step 2, sometimes other way around!). 😉

                                @toggledbits , pursuant to PR#164 (Closed), I'm unfortunately still grappling with a Rule that (SOMETIMES!) refuses to fire, even when all Conditions go TRUE virtually simultaneously. I may be the world's worst Log reader, but I think the following snippet of said Rule's evaluation process supports what I'm saying:

                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.810Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:749> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 dependency notification entity-changed Entity#vera>device_211 from Entity#vera>device_211
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.811Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:755> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 requesting eval; entity-changed Entity#vera>device_211
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.812Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:950> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 (Alexa Director (alexa)) evaluate() acquiring mutex
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.813Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:954> Rule#rule-knay6sc6._evaluate() mutex acquired, evaluating
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.813Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:958> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 update rate is 0/min limit 60/min
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.814Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:880> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 evaluateExpressions() with 3 expressions
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.815Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:970> Rule#rule-knay6sc6._evaluate() trigger state now false (was false)
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.816Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:972> Rule#rule-knay6sc6._evaluate() constraints state false
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.817Z <Rule:null> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 rule state now false, changed no
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.936Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:749> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 dependency notification entity-changed Entity#vera>device_211 from Entity#vera>device_211
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.938Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:755> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 requesting eval; entity-changed Entity#vera>device_211
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.939Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:950> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 (Alexa Director (alexa)) evaluate() acquiring mutex
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.940Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:954> Rule#rule-knay6sc6._evaluate() mutex acquired, evaluating
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.941Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:958> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 update rate is 1/min limit 60/min
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.942Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:880> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 evaluateExpressions() with 3 expressions
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.943Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:970> Rule#rule-knay6sc6._evaluate() trigger state now false (was false)
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.945Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:1578> cond cond6zfyayg evaluation state false->true
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.946Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:1578> cond const evaluation state false->true
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.947Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:972> Rule#rule-knay6sc6._evaluate() constraints state true
                                2021-04-13T14:43:07.948Z <Rule:null> Rule#rule-knay6sc6 rule state now false, changed no
                                

                                i.e. both the Triggers and Constraints condition (one each) jump to TRUE, yet the Rule itself remains FALSE, leaving another Rule (which watches this one's state) flapping in the breeze.

                                Didn't wanna clutter Mantis with this, but happy to. First wanted to pass this by you here, so you could request files/evidence.

                                As additional background, what's supposed to happen is Alexa hears me utter a preset phrase, causing an Alexa Routine to run. It runs fine (I know because she speaks and turns on music) and performs the two steps (turning on a VS on Vera and dimming another one to a specific value), which I see go "green" in MSR. And yet, as described herein, the Rule itself just sits idle.

                                Thanks for any guidance here!

                                • LS
                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • toggledbitsT Offline
                                  toggledbitsT Offline
                                  toggledbits
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #43
                                  2021-04-13T14:43:07.943Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:970> Rule#rule-knay6sc6._evaluate() trigger state now false (was false).
                                  

                                  This is saying the trigger state is false. It says that in both cases. It follows by saying the rule state is false (which is correct if the triggers are false). The constraints are indeed true, but if the triggers are false, the rule state will still be false.

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

                                  LibraSunL 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • toggledbitsT toggledbits
                                    2021-04-13T14:43:07.943Z <Rule:5:Rule.js:970> Rule#rule-knay6sc6._evaluate() trigger state now false (was false).
                                    

                                    This is saying the trigger state is false. It says that in both cases. It follows by saying the rule state is false (which is correct if the triggers are false). The constraints are indeed true, but if the triggers are false, the rule state will still be false.

                                    LibraSunL Offline
                                    LibraSunL Offline
                                    LibraSun
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #44

                                    @toggledbits said in Low-priority GUI feedback:

                                    This is saying the trigger state is false.

                                    Much appreciated, and sorry for the n00b question. I've spent the morning chasing down gremlins left and right surrounding this "Alexa Director" endeavor, and I give up. I inadvertently created a thicket of Franken-Rules which deserve to go back into the grave.

                                    Think I'll stick with Virtual Switches after all, as they are far more deterministic, predictable, and UI friendly than any attempt I've made thus far to reinvent them with pure logic.

                                    Ha ha, I was having Triggers accidentally trigger multiple Rules and then, once tightened down even further, NONE of the Rules.

                                    I will henceforth regard the VS as a necessary resource on Vera, especially when used as an adjunct to Alexa Routines.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • toggledbitsT Offline
                                      toggledbitsT Offline
                                      toggledbits
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #45

                                      Not a n00b question at all. I'd really like to see for myself what's happening. If you still experiment with it more, crank the rule's log level to 6, and send me the results.

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

                                      LibraSunL 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                                        Not a n00b question at all. I'd really like to see for myself what's happening. If you still experiment with it more, crank the rule's log level to 6, and send me the results.

                                        LibraSunL Offline
                                        LibraSunL Offline
                                        LibraSun
                                        wrote on last edited by LibraSun
                                        #46

                                        @toggledbits said in Low-priority GUI feedback:

                                        I'd really like to see for myself what's happening. If you still experiment with it more, crank the rule's log level to 6, and send me the results.

                                        I'm sure to fiddle around further, but intend that to happen with inconsequential test Rules rather than some of my most prized "Leaving Home", "Coming Home" level workflows.

                                        Will advise... thx.

                                        P.S. You may legitimately ask, "Why are you trying to avoid Virtual Switches in the first place?" Answer: Because I hate having to create them, configure them, propagate them through the Vera UI (rename, relocate, hard refresh) and again through the Alexa ecosystem (name, discover, configure in Routines, etc.). I've been searching for a quick-to-expand alternative method, one that presents itself in all four UIs (Vera, MSR, Alexa, VeraMobile) with rapid adaptability to new workflows (e.g. "Time for Doing a Puzzle") which I might in turn choose to knock down after a few days.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        1
                                        • LibraSunL Offline
                                          LibraSunL Offline
                                          LibraSun
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #47
                                          This post is deleted!
                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          Recent Topics

                                          • [Solved] Local expression in Rule does not evaluate as they used to do
                                            CrilleC
                                            Crille
                                            0
                                            5
                                            99

                                          • Reactor (Multi-System/Multi-Hub) Announcements
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            5
                                            130
                                            74.0k

                                          • Home Assistant 2025.11.2 and latest-25315
                                            G
                                            gwp1
                                            0
                                            6
                                            120

                                          • Notice to Docker + ARM Users (RPi 3/4/5 and others)
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            1
                                            1
                                            61

                                          • Requesting a proper ARM64/aarch64 Docker image (Pi 5 support)
                                            M
                                            mgvra
                                            1
                                            3
                                            148

                                          • Script action and custom timers
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            0
                                            4
                                            158

                                          • Help resolve change in behaviour post update
                                            CatmanV2C
                                            CatmanV2
                                            0
                                            12
                                            437

                                          • There is an alternative to homebridge-mqttthing
                                            akbooerA
                                            akbooer
                                            1
                                            2
                                            126

                                          • Reactor w/HA 2025.11 error on set_datetime service call setting only time
                                            CrilleC
                                            Crille
                                            0
                                            6
                                            180

                                          • Reactor Version 25310 : Office Light control via rule in reactor no longer working since last update.
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            0
                                            17
                                            523

                                          • Shelly Wall Display XL
                                            akbooerA
                                            akbooer
                                            2
                                            9
                                            833

                                          • [Solved] alarm() in global expression throws error in log.
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            0
                                            26
                                            944
                                          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