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. Feature Request - Wait for an event/trigger within Reaction [Solved with Work Around]
[Solved] Limit HA Entity in MSR
wmarcolinW
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
Organizing/ structuring rule sets and rules
R
Hi guys, Just wondering how you guys organize your rule sets and rules. I wish I had an extra layer to have some more granularity, but my feature request was not popular. Maybe there are better ways to organize my rule sets. I use the rule sets now primarily for rooms. So a rule set per room. But maybe grouping by functionality works better. Any examples/ suggestions would be appreciated.
Multi-System Reactor
Moving MSR from a QNAP container to RP 5 - some issues
Tom_DT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Widget deletion does not work and landing page (status) is empy
M
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Need help reducing false positive notifications
T
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Deleting widgets
tunnusT
Hopefully a trivial question, but how do you delete widgets in a status page? Using build 22266
Multi-System Reactor
MQTT configuration question
tunnusT
I have the following yaml configuration in local_mqtt_devices file x_mqtt_device: set_speed: arguments: speed: type: str topic: "command/%friendly_name%" payload: type: json expr: '{ "fan": parameters.speed }' While this works fine, I'm wondering how this could be changed to "fixed" parameters, as in this case "fan" only accepts "A", "Q" or a numeric value of 1-5?
Multi-System Reactor
System Configuration Check - time is offset
F
Hi! I get this message when I'm on the status tab: System Configuration Check The time on this system and on the Reactor host are significantly different. This may be due to incorrect system configuration on either or both. Please check the configuration of both systems. The host reports 2025-04-01T15:29:29.252Z; browser reports 2025-04-01T15:29:40.528Z; difference 11.276 seconds. I have MSR installed as a docker on my Home Assistant Blue / Hardkernel ODROID-N2/N2+. MSR version is latest-25082-3c348de6. HA versions are: Core 2025.3.4 Supervisor 2025.03.4 Operating System 15.1 I have restarted HA as well as MSR multiple times. This message didn´t show two weeks ago. Don´t know if it have anything to do with the latest MSR version. Do anyone know what I can try? Thanks in advance! Let's Be Careful Out There (Hill Street reference...) /Fanan
Multi-System Reactor
Programmatically capture HTTP Request action status code or error
therealdbT
I have a very strange situation, where if InfluxDB restarts, other containers may fail when restarting at the same time (under not easy to understand circumstances), and InfluxDB remains unreachable (and these containers crashes). I need to reboot these containers in an exact order, after rebooting InfluxDB. While I understand what's going on, I need a way to reliable determine that InfluxDB is not reachable and these containers are not reachable, in order to identify this situation and manually check what's going on - and, maybe, in the future, automatically restart them if needed. So, I was looking at HTTP Request action, but I need to capture the HTTP response code, instead of the response (becase if ping is OK, InfluxDB will reply with a 204), and, potentially, a way to programmatically detect that it's failing to get the response. While I could write a custom HTTP controller for this or a custom HTTP virtual device, I was wondering if this is somewhat on you roadmap @toggledbits Thanks!
Multi-System Reactor
ZwaveJSUI - RGBWW BULB - Warm/Cold White interfered with RGB settings - Bulb doesn't change color if in WarmWhite state.
N
Hi , I'm on -Reactor (Multi-hub) latest-25067-62e21a2d -Docker on Synology NAS -ZWaveJSUI 9.31.0.6c80945 Problem with ZwaveJSUI: When I try to change color to a bulb RGBWW, it doesn't change to the RGB color and the bulb remains warm or cold white. I tryed with Zipato RGBW Bulb V2 RGBWE2, Hank Bulb HKZW-RGB01, Aentec 6 A-ZWA002, so seems that it happens with all RGBWW bulb with reactor/zwavejsui. I'm using from reator the entity action: "rgb_color.set" and "rgb_color.set_rgb". After I send the reactor command, It changes in zwavejsui the rgb settings but doesn't put the white channel to "0", so the prevalent channel remains warm/cold White and the bulb doesn't change into the rgb color. This is the status of the bulb in zwavejsui after "rgb_color.set" (235,33,33,) and the bulb is still warmWhite. x_zwave_values.Color_Switch_currentColor={"warmWhite":204,"coldWhite":0,"red":235,"green":33,"blue":33} The "cold white" and "warm white" settings interfer with the rgb color settings. Reactor can change bulb colors with rgb_color set — (value, ui8, 0x000000 to 0xffffff) or rgb_color set_rgb — (red, green, blue, all ui1, 0 to 255) but if warm or cold white are not to "0", zwavejsui doesn't change them and I can't find a way to change into rgb or from rgb back to warm white. So if I use from reactor: rgb_color set_rgb — (235,33,33) in zwavejsui I have x_zwave_values.Color_Switch_targetColor={"red":235,"green":33,"blue":33} 14/03/2025, 16:43:57 - value updated Arg 0: └─commandClassName: Color Switch └─commandClass: 51 └─property: targetColor └─endpoint: 0 └─newValue └──red: 235 └──green: 33 └──blue: 33 └─prevValue └──red: 235 └──green: 33 └──blue: 33 └─propertyName: targetColor 14/03/2025, 16:43:57 - value updated Arg 0: └─commandClassName: Color Switch └─commandClass: 51 └─property: currentColor └─endpoint: 0 └─newValue └──warmWhite: 204 └──coldWhite: 0 └──red: 235 └──green: 33 └──blue: 33 └─prevValue └──warmWhite: 204 └──coldWhite: 0 └──red: 235 └──green: 33 └──blue: 33 └─propertyName: currentColor In zwavejsui, the bulb changes rgb set but warm White remains to "204" and the bulb remais on warm White channel bacause is prevalent on rgb set. x_zwave_values.Color_Switch_currentColor_0=204 x_zwave_values.Color_Switch_currentColor_1=0 x_zwave_values.Color_Switch_currentColor_2=235 x_zwave_values.Color_Switch_currentColor_3=33 x_zwave_values.Color_Switch_currentColor_4=33 Is it possible to targetColor also for "warmWhite" and "coldWhite" and have something similar to this? x_zwave_values.Color_Switch_targetColor={"warmWhite":0,"coldWhite":0,"red":235,"green":33,"blue":33} Thanks in advance.
Multi-System Reactor
Problem with simultaneous notifications.
T
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Problem after upgrading to 25067
R
MSR had been running fine, but I decided to follow the message to upgrade to 25067. Since the upgrade, I have received the message "Controller "<name>" (HubitatController hubitat2) could not be loaded at startup. Its ID is not unique." MSR throws the message on every restart. Has anyone else encountered this problem? I am running MSR on a Raspberry Pi4 connecting to two Hubitat units over an OpenVPN tunnel. One C8 and a C8 Pro. Both are up-to-date. It appears that despite the error message that MSR may be operating properly.
Multi-System Reactor
Global expressions not always evaluated
tunnusT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[Solved] Local expression evaluation
V
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[Solved] Runtime error when exiting global reaction that contains a group
S
I am getting a Runtime error on different browsers when I click exit when editing an existing or creating a new global reaction containing a group. If the global reaction does not have a group I don't get an error. I see a similar post on the forum about a Runtime Error when creating reactions but started a new thread as that appears to be solved. The Runtime Error is different in the two browsers Safari v18.3 @http://192.168.10.21:8111/reactor/en-US/lib/js/reaction-list.js:171:44 You may report this error, but do not screen shot it. Copy-paste the complete text. Remember to include a description of the operation you were performing in as much detail as possible. Report using the Reactor Bug Tracker (in your left navigation) or at the SmartHome Community. Google Chrome 133.0.6943.142 TypeError: self.editor.isModified is not a function at HTMLButtonElement.<anonymous> (http://192.168.10.21:8111/reactor/en-US/lib/js/reaction-list.js:171:34) You may report this error, but do not screen shot it. Copy-paste the complete text. Remember to include a description of the operation you were performing in as much detail as possible. Report using the Reactor Bug Tracker (in your left navigation) or at the SmartHome Community. Steps to reproduce: Click the pencil to edit a global reaction with a group. Click the Exit button. Runtime error appears. or Click Create Reaction Click Add Action Select Group Add Condition such as Entity Attribute. Add an Action. Click Save Click Exit Runtime error appears. I don’t know how long the error has been there as I haven’t edited the global reaction in a long time. Reactor (Multi-hub) latest-25060-f32eaa46 Docker Mac OS: 15.3.1 Thanks
Multi-System Reactor
Cannot delete Global Expressions
SnowmanS
I am trying to delete a global expression (gLightDelay) but for some strange reason, it comes back despite clicking the Delete this expression and Save Changes buttons. I have not created a global expression for some times and just noticed this while doing some clean-up. I have upgraded Reactor to 25067 from 25060 and the behaviour is still there. I have restarted Reactor (as well as restarting its container) and cleared the browser's cache several times without success. Here's what the log shows. [latest-25067]2025-03-08T23:50:22.690Z <wsapi:INFO> [WSAPI]wsapi#1 rpc_echo [Object]{ "comment": "UI activity" } [latest-25067]2025-03-08T23:50:26.254Z <GlobalExpression:NOTICE> Deleting global expression gLightDelay [latest-25067]2025-03-08T23:50:27.887Z <wsapi:INFO> [WSAPI]wsapi#1 rpc_echo [Object]{ "comment": "UI activity" } Reactor latest-25067-62e21a2d Docker on Synology NAS
Multi-System Reactor
Local notification methods?
CatmanV2C
Morning, experts. Hard on learning about the internet check script in MSR tools, I was wondering what suggestions anyone has about a local (i.e. non-internet dependent) notification method. This was prompted by yesterday's fun and games with my ISP. I've got the script Cronned and working properly but short of flashing a light on and off, I'm struggling to think of a way of alerting me (ideally to my phone) I guess I could set up a Discord server at home, but that feels like overkill for a rare occasion. Any other suggestions? TIA C
Multi-System Reactor
Custom capabilities in MQTT templates
M
Hi, I'm trying to integrate the sonos-mqtt (https://sonos2mqtt.svrooij.io/) with the MSR and it's coming along nicely so far. But cannot wrap my head around how to define custom capabilities in MQTT templates. I need this for the TTS announcements and similarly for the notification sounds where I would pass the sound file as parameter. So this is what I have in the local_mqtt_devices.yaml capabilities: x_sonos_announcement: attributes: actions: speak: arguments: text: type: string volume: type: int delay: type: int And this is the template: templates: sonos-announcement: capabilities: - x_sonos_announcement actions: x_sonos_announcement: speak: topic: "sonos/cmd/speak" payload: expr: > { "text": parameters.text, "volume": parameters.volume, "delayMs": parameters.delay, "onlyWhenPlaying": false, "engine": "neural" } type: json So the speak action should send something like this to topic sonos/cmd/speak { "text": "message goes here", "volume": 50, "delayMs": 100, "onlyWhenPlaying": false, "engine": "neural" } At startup the MSR seems to be quite unhappy with my configuration: reactor | [latest-25016]2025-02-09T08:19:59.029Z <MQTTController:WARN> MQTTController#mqtt entity Entity#mqtt>sonos-announcement unable to configure capabilities [Array][ "x_sonos_announcement" ] reactor | i18n: missing fi-FI language string: Configuration for {0:q} is incomplete because the following requested capabilities are undefined: {1} reactor | i18n: missing fi-FI language string: Configuration for {0:q} has unrecognized capability {1:q} in actions reactor | Trace: Configuration for {0:q} is incomplete because the following requested capabilities are undefined: {1} reactor | at _T (/opt/reactor/server/lib/i18n.js:611:28) reactor | at AlertManager.addAlert (/opt/reactor/server/lib/AlertManager.js:125:25) reactor | at MQTTController.sendWarning (/opt/reactor/server/lib/Controller.js:627:30) reactor | at MQTTController.start (/var/reactor/ext/MQTTController/MQTTController.js:268:26) reactor | at async Promise.allSettled (index 0) Configuration for "sonos-announcement" has unrecognized capability "x_sonos_announcement" in actions Controller: MQTTController#mqtt Last 10:21:37 AM Configuration for "sonos-announcement" is incomplete because the following requested capabilities are undefined: x_sonos_announcement Controller: MQTTController#mqtt Last 10:21:37 AM This is probably a pretty stupid question and the approach may not even work at all, but maybe someone or @toggledbits for sure, could point me to the right direction. Basically the idea is to be able to send TTS messages from reactions using entity actions. I've previously used HTTP requests to Sonos HTTP API (https://hub.docker.com/r/chrisns/docker-node-sonos-http-api/) for the same functionality, but since moving to sonos-mqtt, I need a way to send the TTS notifications using MQTTController. Along with the actual message, volume and delay must also be parameterizable. br, mgvra MSR latest-25016-d47fea38 / MQTTController [0.2.24293]
Multi-System Reactor
[SOLVED]Hass websocket falsely reporting ready on boot??
V
Hi, @toggledbits I just noticed that following a reboot of my raspberry pi, some of the rules, that I was expecting to recover, are not catching up following a reboot. I have made a simple test rule (rule-m6rz6ol1) with only "after Date/time" as trigger and "turn on a lamp" as a set reaction. All my infrastructure is on the same board so Reactor, Hass, Zwavejs, ... are all rebooting. Here is the sequence of the test case (All time converted to Zulu to match logs): Rule "after Date/Time" set to 14:05:00z Shutdown on Raspberry Pi at 14:04:00z Power back up at 14:08:00z Rule overview shows true as of 14:08:14z waiting for 00:00:00 in GUI From the log I can see that MSR is picking up the rule and knows that the state of the rule has changed from false to true and tries to send the update to HASS but failed with websocket error. Here is what I see from the log: 14:04:04z shutdown complete 14:08:08z Power up 14:08:13.111z websocket connection 14:08:15:323z Reaction to the light failed, Websocket not opened After there is a series of websocket connection attempt until 14:08:51z where it seemed to be really ready. Back in 2021 we had a discussion (https://smarthome.community/topic/700/solved-start-up?_=1738766986566) and you proposed to add a startup_delay:xxxx and startup_wait:xxxx parameter in the engine section of "reactor.yaml". When I try the startup_delay (this used to be a hard delay), the engine failed to start (I think). I then try the startup_wait:xxxx without any success. Since it wait for the connection status to be up to cancel the delay, it does not do anyting since Hass is reporting the socket up without really being up ( I think...). Questions: Did I figured it all wrong? should the startup_delay:xxxxx have worked? Any ideas? Here is the log: OK now I am stuck. I did add the log but when I submit the editor complained saying that I am limited to 32767 characters. The log from the shutdown to the time the websocket is stable is about 300000 character long. What are my options?
Multi-System Reactor

Feature Request - Wait for an event/trigger within Reaction [Solved with Work Around]

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Multi-System Reactor
12 Posts 5 Posters 839 Views 5 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.
  • 3 Offline
    3 Offline
    3rdStng
    wrote on last edited by 3rdStng
    #1

    I think this feature request could be accomplished with the use of two or more rules, but it would be great if there was a way to wait for an event or trigger to occur before continuing on in the reactions.

    For example, I have a rule that will turn on some exterior lights if you arrive home after the porch lights have been turned off. Right now this rule randomly will turn off between 5-10 minutes after the person has entered the geofence. On some occasions this 5-10 minutes isn't long enough, say if you are unloading the car or something. I would like to kick off the reaction, but pause it part way through and wait for the door to close and lock, then continue it on. Hubitat Rule Machine has a "Wait for event" option, but I really want to keep all my logic within MSR.

    toggledbitsT 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • 3 3rdStng

      I think this feature request could be accomplished with the use of two or more rules, but it would be great if there was a way to wait for an event or trigger to occur before continuing on in the reactions.

      For example, I have a rule that will turn on some exterior lights if you arrive home after the porch lights have been turned off. Right now this rule randomly will turn off between 5-10 minutes after the person has entered the geofence. On some occasions this 5-10 minutes isn't long enough, say if you are unloading the car or something. I would like to kick off the reaction, but pause it part way through and wait for the door to close and lock, then continue it on. Hubitat Rule Machine has a "Wait for event" option, but I really want to keep all my logic within MSR.

      toggledbitsT Offline
      toggledbitsT Offline
      toggledbits
      wrote on last edited by toggledbits
      #2

      @3rdStng said in Feature Request - Wait for an event/trigger within Reaction:

      I would like to kick off the reaction, but pause it part way through and wait for the door to close and lock, then continue it on.

      A Repeat...While group will execute and prevent the remainder of the Reaction from running until it breaks (conditions are no longer met).

      e520a1f9-7084-41c4-9aef-1ec834a068ff-image.png

      The delay prevents it from becoming a huge CPU consumer.

      Yes, this is a bit of a kludge, and a dedicated action could be more useful. I'll look into it, but in the meanwhile, this workaround should play nicely.

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

      tunnusT 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • 3 Offline
        3 Offline
        3rdStng
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Hmm.... Thanks for this, I think I can make it work, but it may take two Repeat While actions. It doesn't appear that I can wait for a change. It's only waiting for a True or False and not a change from Opened to Closed.

        I believe in my rule I would need a "Repeat While the door is false" (open) to wait for someone to actually open the door. Then a "Repeat While the door is true" (closed) to wait for them to close the door and then continuing on the actions to turn off the lights.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • PablaP Offline
          PablaP Offline
          Pabla
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          You read my mind! I have been wanting a "wait for" action in MSR for a while now never got around to making a post for it. I would want it to closely match the implementation made in HA for the "wait for trigger" action

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • toggledbitsT Offline
            toggledbitsT Offline
            toggledbits
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            Well, really if it's just as simple as turning on the lights when the door opens, and then waiting for a close to turn them off, the rule trigger conditions should handle detecting the door opening, and the first action in the Set reaction would be to turn the lights on. Then you can wait for the door to close, and turn the lights off.

            But then, if the rule triggers are only detecting if the door is open, why not have the Set reaction turn the lights on, and the Reset reaction turn the lights off? No "wait for" needed at all, because the logic is handling it.

            As you disclose details, it's beginning to look like you've imagined a solution based on some other product, and you're trying to get Reactor to work its way, instead of doing it "the Reactor way."

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

            3 PablaP 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • toggledbitsT toggledbits

              Well, really if it's just as simple as turning on the lights when the door opens, and then waiting for a close to turn them off, the rule trigger conditions should handle detecting the door opening, and the first action in the Set reaction would be to turn the lights on. Then you can wait for the door to close, and turn the lights off.

              But then, if the rule triggers are only detecting if the door is open, why not have the Set reaction turn the lights on, and the Reset reaction turn the lights off? No "wait for" needed at all, because the logic is handling it.

              As you disclose details, it's beginning to look like you've imagined a solution based on some other product, and you're trying to get Reactor to work its way, instead of doing it "the Reactor way."

              3 Offline
              3 Offline
              3rdStng
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              @toggledbits said in Feature Request - Wait for an event/trigger within Reaction:

              As you disclose details, it's beginning to look like you've imagined a solution based on some other product, and you're trying to get Reactor to work its way, instead of doing it "the Reactor way."

              That is very possible. I'm still mentally mapping this out too. And I 100% know that an image of my rule set would really help clear things up. I'm not in a position to get a screenshot at the moment. I'll try to put my thoughts in to text. (scary)

              Rule set as of today:
              Triggers:
              After midnight AND
              Before sunrise AND
              Any Presence Sensor in the group changes from Not Present to Present

              Actions:
              Turn on the porch light
              Turn on the driveway lights
              Wait for a random period of time between 10-15 minutes
              Turn off the porch light
              Turn off the driveway lights

              What I am after is within the Actions only. The Triggers are still the same.

              Actions:
              Turn on the porch light
              Turn on the driveway lights
              Wait until the HE Hub variable "lastDoorLockEvent" reports "Manually locked"
              Wait for a random period of time between 10-15 minutes
              Turn off the porch light
              Turn off the driveway lights

              The waiting until the hub variable is what's potentially causing the issue. When I go to bed, and assuming the door was open, I'll close it and lock it. So the hub variable now reports "Manually locked". If someone arrives after midnight and before sunrise, the variable will still report "Manually locked" since the lock status hasn't changed yet. So theoretically MSR won't wait since it already sees the variable as what it is looking for.

              And as I type this out, I suppose I could insert a set variable into the actions. I honestly haven't looked yet, but can MSR set a variable that is local to the hub only? Not within MSR.

              Actions:
              Turn on the porch light
              Turn on the driveway lights
              Set HE Hub variable "lastDoorLockEvent" to "waiting entry"
              Repeat Until the HE Hub variable "lastDoorLockEvent" reports "Manually locked"
              Wait for a random period of time between 10-15 minutes
              Turn off the porch light
              Turn off the driveway lights

              The entire concept stems from Hubitat's Rule Machine's "Wait for event" that you can define in a rule. I have a couple of these at my remote HE, where I can't run MSR easily.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • toggledbitsT Offline
                toggledbitsT Offline
                toggledbits
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                OK. This makes it much more clear. Your solution is workable. There are a few ways to attack it, but what you've posted should work. You picked up on the state of the hub variable, which is important. You hub variable should appear as an entity with the string_sensor capability, and it should have an extended action (x_hubitat_Variable.setVariable) to let you change the value.

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

                3 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                  OK. This makes it much more clear. Your solution is workable. There are a few ways to attack it, but what you've posted should work. You picked up on the state of the hub variable, which is important. You hub variable should appear as an entity with the string_sensor capability, and it should have an extended action (x_hubitat_Variable.setVariable) to let you change the value.

                  3 Offline
                  3 Offline
                  3rdStng
                  wrote on last edited by 3rdStng
                  #8

                  @toggledbits said in Feature Request - Wait for an event/trigger within Reaction:

                  hub variable should appear as an entity with the string_sensor capability, and it should have an extended action (x_hubitat_Variable.setVariable) to let you change the value.

                  Worked perfectly!

                  Thank you for the feedback and allowing me to type out my thoughts to refine this rule.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                    Well, really if it's just as simple as turning on the lights when the door opens, and then waiting for a close to turn them off, the rule trigger conditions should handle detecting the door opening, and the first action in the Set reaction would be to turn the lights on. Then you can wait for the door to close, and turn the lights off.

                    But then, if the rule triggers are only detecting if the door is open, why not have the Set reaction turn the lights on, and the Reset reaction turn the lights off? No "wait for" needed at all, because the logic is handling it.

                    As you disclose details, it's beginning to look like you've imagined a solution based on some other product, and you're trying to get Reactor to work its way, instead of doing it "the Reactor way."

                    PablaP Offline
                    PablaP Offline
                    Pabla
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    @toggledbits One case I can think of where this is useful is as follows. Note I try to avoid making multiple rules to achieve this since it make managing them much harder.

                    I have some triggers (not relevant in this example) for my front doorbell when a person, vehicle, animal or package is detected. Each of these have their own respective rule. In the actions I have TTS action that says "{object name} detected at the front door". I also have another action after that send a notification to my phone with a snapshot and description of the doorbell activity.

                    The problem I run into, is that on occasion the snapshot takes a few extra seconds to come through. Now in my case I want the TTS to say what's at the door right away regardless of the snapshot since its irrelevant and then wait till the snapshot updates to send the push notification.

                    To combat the delay I added a condition in my triggers that wait for the snapshot time to update before sending the TTS and notification. Using this workaround it introduces a delay in the TTS action as well. Ideally having a "wait for" action for when the snapshot updates to then send the notification will fix the problem without needing to create another rule.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • 3 Offline
                      3 Offline
                      3rdStng
                      wrote on last edited by 3rdStng
                      #10

                      Refined my actions to include a timeout, just in case someone comes home, but they leave without entering the door.

                      Actions:
                      Set variable 'lastLockEvent' to "pending entry"
                      Turn on porch light
                      Turn on driveway lights
                      Repeat While:
                      -- Triggers:
                      -- [lastLockEvent] contains "manually locked"
                      -- [OR]
                      -- [lastLockEvent] contains "pending entry" (condition sustained for 20 minutes)
                      -- Actions:
                      -- Delay 10 seconds
                      Delay random between 1 to 5 minutes
                      Turn off porch light
                      Turn off driveway lights

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                        @3rdStng said in Feature Request - Wait for an event/trigger within Reaction:

                        I would like to kick off the reaction, but pause it part way through and wait for the door to close and lock, then continue it on.

                        A Repeat...While group will execute and prevent the remainder of the Reaction from running until it breaks (conditions are no longer met).

                        e520a1f9-7084-41c4-9aef-1ec834a068ff-image.png

                        The delay prevents it from becoming a huge CPU consumer.

                        Yes, this is a bit of a kludge, and a dedicated action could be more useful. I'll look into it, but in the meanwhile, this workaround should play nicely.

                        tunnusT Offline
                        tunnusT Offline
                        tunnus
                        wrote on last edited by tunnus
                        #11

                        @toggledbits just an idea related to this "repeat...while" group that it could benefit from similar functionality as is available for pulse to prevent it from looping indefinitely. There are sometimes devices not updating their status properly and in those cases it would be nice to ensure exit within reasonable time.

                        This functionality can be done in a following way, for example, but would be more straightforward if it was already built-in

                        Screenshot 2024-08-07 at 21.53.46.png

                        Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        • therealdbT Offline
                          therealdbT Offline
                          therealdb
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          For me a "for/foreach" could be useful as well, when dealing with multiple devices and the same actions. Now this part is all code.

                          --
                          On a mission to automate everything.

                          My MS Reactor contrib
                          My Luup Plug-ins

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


                          Recent Topics

                          • [Solved] Limit HA Entity in MSR
                            wmarcolinW
                            wmarcolin
                            0
                            7
                            63

                          • Reactor (Multi-System/Multi-Hub) Announcements
                            toggledbitsT
                            toggledbits
                            5
                            121
                            35.2k

                          • Disaster recovery and virtualisation
                            CatmanV2C
                            CatmanV2
                            0
                            5
                            584

                          • Remote access of Zwave stick from Z-wave server
                            CatmanV2C
                            CatmanV2
                            0
                            3
                            308

                          • Organizing/ structuring rule sets and rules
                            G
                            gwp1
                            0
                            5
                            348

                          • Moving MSR from a QNAP container to RP 5 - some issues
                            G
                            gwp1
                            0
                            5
                            298

                          • Widget deletion does not work and landing page (status) is empy
                            G
                            gwp1
                            0
                            4
                            268

                          • Need help reducing false positive notifications
                            T
                            tamorgen
                            0
                            7
                            463

                          • Deleting widgets
                            toggledbitsT
                            toggledbits
                            0
                            4
                            440

                          • MQTT configuration question
                            tunnusT
                            tunnus
                            0
                            11
                            595
                          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