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. [Reactor] Variables not updating correctly in latest-25201-2aa18550
How to upgrade from an old version of MSR?
cw-kidC
Hello I haven't updated my installation of MSR in a very long time. Its a bare metal Linux install currently on version 24366-3de60836 I see the latest version is now latest-26011-c621bbc7 I assume I cannot just jump from a very old version to the latest version? Or can I? Thanks
Multi-System Reactor
Access control - allowing anonymous user to dashboard
tunnusT
Using build 25328 and having the following users.yaml configuration: users: # This section defines your valid users. admin: ******* groups: # This section defines your user groups. Optionally, it defines application # and API access restrictions (ACLs) for the group. Users may belong to # more than one group. Again, no required or special groups here. admin_group: users: - admin applications: true # special form allows access to ALL applications guests: users: "*" applications: - dashboard api_acls: # This ACL allows users in the "admin" group to access the API - url: "/api" group: admin_group allow: true log: true # This ACL allows anyone/thing to access the /api/v1/alive API endpoint - url: "/api/v1/alive" allow: true session: timeout: 7200 # (seconds) rolling: true # activity extends timeout when true # If log_acls is true, the selected ACL for every API access is logged. log_acls: true # If debug_acls is true, even more information about ACL selection is logged. debug_acls: true My goal is to allow anonymous user to dashboard, but MSR is still asking for a password when trying to access that. Nothing in the logs related to dashboard access. Probably an error in the configuration, but help needed to find that. Tried to put url: "/dashboard" under api_acls, but that was a long shot and didn't work.
Multi-System Reactor
VEC Virtual Switch Auto Off
S
I use Virtual Entity Controller virtual switches which I turn on via webhooks from other applications. Once a switch triggers and turns on, I can then activate associated rules. I would like each virtual switch to automatically turn off after a configurable time (e.g., 5 seconds, 10 seconds). Is there a better way to achieve this auto-off behavior instead of creating a separate rule for each switch that uses the 'Condition must be sustained for' option to turn it off? With a large number of these switches (and the associated turn-off rules), I'm checking to see if there is a simpler approach.If not, could this be a feature request to add an auto-off timer directly to the virtual switches. Thanks Reactor (Multi-hub) latest-26011-c621bbc7 VirtualEntityController v25356 Synology Docker
Multi-System Reactor
Upcoming Storage Change -- Got Back-ups?
toggledbitsT
TL;DR: Format of data in storage directory will soon change. Make sure you are backing up the contents of that directory in its entirety, and you preserve your backups for an extended period, particularly the backup you take right before upgrading to the build containing this change (date of that is still to be determined, but soon). The old data format will remain readable (so you'll be able to read your pre-change backups) for the foreseeable future. In support of a number of other changes in the works, I have found it necessary to change the storage format for Reactor objects in storage at the physical level. Until now, plain, standard JSON has been used to store the data (everything under the storage directory). This has served well, but has a few limitations, including no real support for native JavaScript objects like Date, Map, Set, and others. It also is unable to store data that contains "loops" — objects that reference themselves in some way. I'm not sure exactly when, but in the not-too-distant future I will publish a build using the new data format. It will automatically convert existing JSON data to the new format. For the moment, it will save data in both the new format and the old JSON format, preferring the former when loading data from storage. I have been running my own home with this new format for several months, and have no issues with data loss or corruption. A few other things to know: If you are not already backing up your storage directory, you should be. At a minimum, back this directory up every time you make big changes to your Rules, Reactions, etc. Your existing JSON-format backups will continue to be readable for the long-term (years). The code that loads data from these files looks for the new file format first (which will have a .dval suffix), and if not found, will happily read (and convert) a same-basenamed .json file (i.e. it looks for ruleid.dval first, and if it doesn't find it, it tries to load ruleid.json). I'll publish detailed instructions for restoring from old backups when the build is posted (it's easy). The new .dval files are not directly human-readable or editable as easily as the old .json files. A new utility will be provided in the tools directory to convert .dval data to .json format, which you can then read or edit if you find that necessary. However, that may not work for all future data, as my intent is to make more native JavaScript objects directly storable, and many of those objects cannot be stored in JSON. You may need to modify your backup tools/scripts to pick up the new files: if you explicitly name .json files (rather than just specifying the entire storage directory) in your backup configuration, you will need to add .dval files to get a complete, accurate backup. I don't think this will be an issue for any of you; I imagine that you're all just backing up the entire contents of storage regardless of format/name, that is the safest (and IMO most correct) way to go (if that's not what you're doing, consider changing your approach). The current code stores the data in both the .dval form and the .json form to hedge against any real-world problems I don't encounter in my own use. Some future build will drop this redundancy (i.e. save only to .dval form). However, the read code for the .json form will remain in any case. This applies only to persistent storage that Reactor creates and controls under the storage tree. All other JSON data files (e.g. device data for Controllers) are unaffected by this change and will remain in that form. YAML files are also unaffected by this change. This thread is open for any questions or concerns.
Multi-System Reactor
Oddness in Copy/Move of Reactions
G
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[Solved] function isRuleEnabled() issue
CrilleC
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[Reactor] Problem with Global Reactions and groups
therealdbT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Possible feature request 2?
CatmanV2C
Just another thought. Adding devices from my Home Assistant / Zigbee2MQTT integration. Works perfectly but they always add as their IEEE address. Some of these devices have up to 10 entities associated, and the moment they are renamed to something sensible, each of those entities 'ceases to exist' in MSR. I like things tidy, and deleting each defunct entity needs 3 clicks. Any chance of a 'bulk delete' option? No biggy as I've pretty much finished my Z-wave migration and I don't expect to be adding more than 2 new Zigbee devices Cheers C
Multi-System Reactor
Reactor (Multi-System/Multi-Hub) Announcements
toggledbitsT
Build 21228 has been released. Docker images available from DockerHub as usual, and bare-metal packages here. Home Assistant up to version 2021.8.6 supported; the online version of the manual will now state the current supported versions; Fix an error in OWMWeatherController that could cause it to stop updating; Unify the approach to entity filtering on all hub interface classes (controllers); this works for device entities only; it may be extended to other entities later; Improve error detail in messages for EzloController during auth phase; Add isRuleSet() and isRuleEnabled() functions to expressions extensions; Implement set action for lock and passage capabilities (makes them more easily scriptable in some cases); Fix a place in the UI where 24-hour time was not being displayed.
Multi-System Reactor
Copying a global reaction
tunnusT
With build 25328, if you copy a global reaction, a new reaction does not appear in the UI unless you do a refresh. I recall this used to work without needing this page refresh? Anyway, only a minor nuisance.
Multi-System Reactor
[Reactor] Bug when sending MQTT boolean payloads
therealdbT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Difficulty defining repeating annual period
R
I have tried numerous ways to define a recurring annual period, for example from December 15 to January 15. No matter which method I try - after and before, between, after and/not after, Reactor reports "waiting for invalid date, invalid date. Some constructs also seem to cause Reactor to hang, timeout and restart. For example "before January 15 is evaluated as true, but reports "waiting for invalid date, invalid date". Does anyone have a tried and true method to define a recurring annual period? I think the "between" that I used successfully in the past may have broken with one of the updates.
Multi-System Reactor
Need help with sequence
T
Good evening all, For about the past week or so, I've been having problems with a specific rule in my home automation that controls when my home goes from an Away mode to Home mode. One of the conditions it checked for was my alarm panel, when it changed from Armed Away to Disarmed. There seems to have been a firmware update on the panel that added an intermittent step of "pending", and I can't say for certain it happens 100% of the time. Is there a way to write a condition that so it changes from one condition, to the next, and then another condition? As in, Home alarm changes from armed_away to pending to disarmed. Thanks.
Multi-System Reactor
Possible feature request?
CatmanV2C
No idea how easy this would be. During my migration away from Z-wave I've been replacing the Z-wave devices with Sonoff which has broken some of my automations. Any chance of a 'Test Reaction' function to call out which ones are broken because an entity no longer exists? Without actually running the reaction? Or does this exist already and I'm just not aware of how to do it? Obviously I can see entities that are no longer available, but not quite what I'm looking for. I guess it's something of an edge case so no huge issue. TIA! C
Multi-System Reactor
Logic Assistance: Exterior Lights on when Illuminance Below Threshold
PablaP
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Time series documentation
tunnusT
Is the current manual (incl. examples) up to date with how retention value is handled in time series configuration? Referring to this post
Multi-System Reactor
MQTT templates for ZIgbee scene controller, or a better way?
CatmanV2C
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Reset a delay
CatmanV2C
I'm sure this has been asked, and answered, but damned if I can figure it out Use case: I have a rear garden with lights. A door from the kitchen into the garden and a door from the garage. Currently if I open the kitchen door the lights come on (yay) and a 3 minute delay starts. After 3 minutes, no matter what else happens, the lights go off (Boo! But also yay!) What I would like is for the 3 minute delay until the lights go off to start from the latest door open event. That is, if I'm going from kitchen to garage, and back again, the lights stay on until there's three minutes of no activity. I've tried 'hacking' with a virtual switch, but can't seem to stop the delay. Any pointers? TIA C
Multi-System Reactor
Reactor Loading Screen Safari
S
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Constraints states visually do not match actual
S
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor

[Reactor] Variables not updating correctly in latest-25201-2aa18550

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Multi-System Reactor
95 Posts 7 Posters 15.7k Views 7 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • toggledbitsT Offline
    toggledbitsT Offline
    toggledbits
    wrote on last edited by
    #4

    Clearly there's a lot of context you haven't posted, so I really don't have enough to go on.

    I can tell you that if a rule is in mid-evaluation, the re-evaluation of variables and triggers in the same rule won't happen instantly or more than once -- infinite loops have to be prevented. What will happen is that a request for re-evaluation will be queued for later, but it's not deterministic when that runs (except that it won't run before the current evaluation completes). If there's already a pending request for re-evaluation queued, new requests are ignored. This is all to prevent infinite loops in rule evaluations where rules manipulate devices and rule-based variables in Reactions that are also part of the rule's dependencies.

    And to be specific, the "Force re-evaluation" only queues a request to re-evaluate the rule's triggers and local variables at some point in the future. It does not instantly and immediately re-evaluate every dependent variable of the variable being set.

    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
    • therealdbT Offline
      therealdbT Offline
      therealdb
      wrote on last edited by
      #5

      Ok, I was probably lucky in the past, I don't know. I could send you the rule's JSON if you want to take a look. Anyway, I'll try to move some logic into set variables for the time being. Thanks.

      --
      On a mission to automate everything.

      My MS Reactor contrib
      My Luup Plug-ins

      tunnusT 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • therealdbT therealdb

        Ok, I was probably lucky in the past, I don't know. I could send you the rule's JSON if you want to take a look. Anyway, I'll try to move some logic into set variables for the time being. Thanks.

        tunnusT Offline
        tunnusT Offline
        tunnus
        wrote on last edited by tunnus
        #6

        @therealdb I noticed a similar behaviour with build 25208, although the issue might have been present also in the earlier (25201) build.

        In essence I have a rule with a global variable correctly triggering when it has a certain value, but in reactions it has a Telegram notification using a local variable as message (like this: ${{ msg }}). And this local variable "msg" is using the same global variable that triggered the rule, but its value is something totally different, i.e. seems that it's not updating.

        I'm also sure this rule was working fine before, with variables correctly updating.

        Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT & ZWA-2

        toggledbitsT 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • tunnusT tunnus

          @therealdb I noticed a similar behaviour with build 25208, although the issue might have been present also in the earlier (25201) build.

          In essence I have a rule with a global variable correctly triggering when it has a certain value, but in reactions it has a Telegram notification using a local variable as message (like this: ${{ msg }}). And this local variable "msg" is using the same global variable that triggered the rule, but its value is something totally different, i.e. seems that it's not updating.

          I'm also sure this rule was working fine before, with variables correctly updating.

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

          @tunnus said in [Reactor] Variables not updating correctly in latest-25201-2aa18550:

          In essence I have a rule with a global variable correctly triggering when it has a certain value, but in reactions it has a Telegram notification using a local variable as message (like this: ${{ msg }}).

          You know what to do (i.e. what I need to see). I can't do anything from just a post like this.

          My simple test case:

          1. I have a global expression/variable testVar (expressionless) with a numeric value assigned.
          2. I have a rule that triggers on testVar changing, and sends me a notification in its SET Reaction (shown below).
          3. I have a Reaction that I can run manually to increment testVar by 1 using a Set Variable action. This triggers the rule.

          This works as expected: when the Reaction is run, testVar is incremented by 1. The change is detected by the rule, which updates its localtest variable and then uses that in a notification, which displays the correct value.

          03efded1-0fad-489a-b700-45744d54f183-image.png

          To be clear here, the Rule triggers on the global variable changing, not the local variable.

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

          tunnusT 2 Replies Last reply
          1
          • toggledbitsT toggledbits

            @tunnus said in [Reactor] Variables not updating correctly in latest-25201-2aa18550:

            In essence I have a rule with a global variable correctly triggering when it has a certain value, but in reactions it has a Telegram notification using a local variable as message (like this: ${{ msg }}).

            You know what to do (i.e. what I need to see). I can't do anything from just a post like this.

            My simple test case:

            1. I have a global expression/variable testVar (expressionless) with a numeric value assigned.
            2. I have a rule that triggers on testVar changing, and sends me a notification in its SET Reaction (shown below).
            3. I have a Reaction that I can run manually to increment testVar by 1 using a Set Variable action. This triggers the rule.

            This works as expected: when the Reaction is run, testVar is incremented by 1. The change is detected by the rule, which updates its localtest variable and then uses that in a notification, which displays the correct value.

            03efded1-0fad-489a-b700-45744d54f183-image.png

            To be clear here, the Rule triggers on the global variable changing, not the local variable.

            tunnusT Offline
            tunnusT Offline
            tunnus
            wrote on last edited by tunnus
            #8

            @toggledbits I did a very similar testing arrangement and got the same results as you, i.e. working fine. I guess I have to monitor this more closely and if this update problem happens again, find a way to reproduce it consistently.

            One notable difference between my production expression and the test expression is that the production one is a lot more complicated:

            Screenshot 2025-08-07 at 22.20.23.png

            Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT & ZWA-2

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • toggledbitsT toggledbits

              @tunnus said in [Reactor] Variables not updating correctly in latest-25201-2aa18550:

              In essence I have a rule with a global variable correctly triggering when it has a certain value, but in reactions it has a Telegram notification using a local variable as message (like this: ${{ msg }}).

              You know what to do (i.e. what I need to see). I can't do anything from just a post like this.

              My simple test case:

              1. I have a global expression/variable testVar (expressionless) with a numeric value assigned.
              2. I have a rule that triggers on testVar changing, and sends me a notification in its SET Reaction (shown below).
              3. I have a Reaction that I can run manually to increment testVar by 1 using a Set Variable action. This triggers the rule.

              This works as expected: when the Reaction is run, testVar is incremented by 1. The change is detected by the rule, which updates its localtest variable and then uses that in a notification, which displays the correct value.

              03efded1-0fad-489a-b700-45744d54f183-image.png

              To be clear here, the Rule triggers on the global variable changing, not the local variable.

              tunnusT Offline
              tunnusT Offline
              tunnus
              wrote on last edited by tunnus
              #9

              @toggledbits, some extra information that I hope will help solve this. I've noticed a few other instances where variables aren't updating. These happen to be Telegram notifications, although I don't think Telegram itself is the issue—it's just that I tend to notice notifications more easily than changes in the UI.

              In all cases, a common denominator is that local variables (in my case, 'msg') that include other local or global variables also contain "if/else" and/or "case" statements.

              Examples below:

              msg = 
              solar_last_day == "ERROR" ? "Error retrieving solar stats" : (solar_last_day > 1 ? "Daily solar stats are ready, total " + round(solar_last_day, 1) + " kWh, peak " + peak_array[0] + " W" + " @" + peak_array[1] : "NA")
              
              
              msg =
              case
                when success == true: "Export limit activated, sell price " + round(g_NordpoolCurrentPriceSellReal, 2) + " c/kWh (VAT 0%-mgin), grid balance " + round(g_FronPowerSum, 0) + " W" 
                when success == false: "Export limit could not be activated?"
                else "Setting export limit failed"
              end
              

              I'm not sure if it's related, but there was a recent bug involving global expressions not updating when certain functions were used (fixed in build 25082)

              Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT & ZWA-2

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

                I'd need a full picture of this... every variable and rule involved. This is a very complex area to look at.

                Again, the key rule to understand here, is that the local variables in a Rule do not update every time a global or other local they refer to changes -- they only update when the Rule has been marked for evaluation. The recomputation of the local variable values occurs before trigger conditions are evaluated, and only then. That is very different from the way global variables are handled.

                Also in your second example, the use of "==" is a "loose" comparison. The use of "===" is tighter and matches type. In your example, if success is 0 (numeric), that will satisfy the test success == false -- that's true because numeric 0 will cast to boolean false, so they are logically equal, although not exactly equal. That alone would explain unexpected results, if the values of success can be other than true or false.

                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
                • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                  I'd need a full picture of this... every variable and rule involved. This is a very complex area to look at.

                  Again, the key rule to understand here, is that the local variables in a Rule do not update every time a global or other local they refer to changes -- they only update when the Rule has been marked for evaluation. The recomputation of the local variable values occurs before trigger conditions are evaluated, and only then. That is very different from the way global variables are handled.

                  Also in your second example, the use of "==" is a "loose" comparison. The use of "===" is tighter and matches type. In your example, if success is 0 (numeric), that will satisfy the test success == false -- that's true because numeric 0 will cast to boolean false, so they are logically equal, although not exactly equal. That alone would explain unexpected results, if the values of success can be other than true or false.

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

                  @toggledbits "success" variable cannot be other than true or false, that I know.

                  But is it so that every time a rule is triggered, its local variables are evaluated (or should be evaluated) at least once?

                  Also, you wrote earlier: "If there's already a pending request for re-evaluation queued, new requests are ignored. This is all to prevent infinite loops in rule evaluations where rules manipulate devices and rule-based variables in Reactions that are also part of the rule's dependencies"

                  I was wondering if this could happen in cases where re-evaluation is queued but somehow gets stuck, and because new requests are ignored, updates won't occur?

                  Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT & ZWA-2

                  toggledbitsT 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • tunnusT tunnus

                    @toggledbits "success" variable cannot be other than true or false, that I know.

                    But is it so that every time a rule is triggered, its local variables are evaluated (or should be evaluated) at least once?

                    Also, you wrote earlier: "If there's already a pending request for re-evaluation queued, new requests are ignored. This is all to prevent infinite loops in rule evaluations where rules manipulate devices and rule-based variables in Reactions that are also part of the rule's dependencies"

                    I was wondering if this could happen in cases where re-evaluation is queued but somehow gets stuck, and because new requests are ignored, updates won't occur?

                    toggledbitsT Offline
                    toggledbitsT Offline
                    toggledbits
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #12

                    @tunnus said in [Reactor] Variables not updating correctly in latest-25201-2aa18550:

                    I was wondering if this could happen in cases where re-evaluation is queued but somehow gets stuck, and because new requests are ignored, updates won't occur?

                    Well, they won't get stuck, but there is no guaranteed order to the re-evaluation. Other things waiting to execute can run before the re-evaluation happens, including things that could change the global variables or entity attributes on which the first Rule depends.

                    Here's something to try (it's the @therealdb solution he mentioned):

                    1. Make msg an expressionless local variable.
                    2. Before your notification, use a Set Variable or Script Action to compute the value of msg that you want to send in the notification.

                    Would look something like this:

                    db9f6cf3-f3c6-4045-8dac-cbfc4a59fd3d-image.png

                    ...or this, using a Script Action...

                    91ba83f7-e245-433c-88ab-fd33e4bc1ea7-image.png

                    I personally prefer the Script Action because you can set several variables at once in the script, if that's what you need, and the syntax looks cleaner (you don't have to use the ${{ }} substitution.

                    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
                    1
                    • therealdbT Offline
                      therealdbT Offline
                      therealdb
                      wrote on last edited by therealdb
                      #13

                      Yep, I confirm I had to update a couple of rules where I had similar variables as @tunnus
                      I used script action because it’s multi line and definitely better in terms of readability.

                      --
                      On a mission to automate everything.

                      My MS Reactor contrib
                      My Luup Plug-ins

                      tunnusT 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                        @tunnus said in [Reactor] Variables not updating correctly in latest-25201-2aa18550:

                        I was wondering if this could happen in cases where re-evaluation is queued but somehow gets stuck, and because new requests are ignored, updates won't occur?

                        Well, they won't get stuck, but there is no guaranteed order to the re-evaluation. Other things waiting to execute can run before the re-evaluation happens, including things that could change the global variables or entity attributes on which the first Rule depends.

                        Here's something to try (it's the @therealdb solution he mentioned):

                        1. Make msg an expressionless local variable.
                        2. Before your notification, use a Set Variable or Script Action to compute the value of msg that you want to send in the notification.

                        Would look something like this:

                        db9f6cf3-f3c6-4045-8dac-cbfc4a59fd3d-image.png

                        ...or this, using a Script Action...

                        91ba83f7-e245-433c-88ab-fd33e4bc1ea7-image.png

                        I personally prefer the Script Action because you can set several variables at once in the script, if that's what you need, and the syntax looks cleaner (you don't have to use the ${{ }} substitution.

                        tunnusT Offline
                        tunnusT Offline
                        tunnus
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #14

                        @toggledbits ok, I'll have to try script action. Still, as @therealdb stated, I'm also sure the "old style" used to work with pre-252xx builds.

                        Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT & ZWA-2

                        tunnusT 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • tunnusT tunnus

                          @toggledbits ok, I'll have to try script action. Still, as @therealdb stated, I'm also sure the "old style" used to work with pre-252xx builds.

                          tunnusT Offline
                          tunnusT Offline
                          tunnus
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #15

                          Some strange results happened while I was experimenting with script action. I noticed that the order of local variables had an effect whether those variables did update or not.

                          If I had e.g. the following order:

                          case1.png

                          "peak_power" did not update. But if I switched places of "ok_to_reset" and "peak_power", "peak_power" started to update in real-time:

                          case2.png

                          Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT & ZWA-2

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • toggledbitsT Offline
                            toggledbitsT Offline
                            toggledbits
                            wrote on last edited by toggledbits
                            #16

                            Post your script. Based on the instructions given, your local variables should be expressionless, so that seems wrong and I want to see what your script is trying to do.

                            I can tell you right now, if ok_to_reset is expressionless and you are resetting it in the Script Action script, and expecting peak_power to see the updated value, it won't work.

                            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
                            • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                              Post your script. Based on the instructions given, your local variables should be expressionless, so that seems wrong and I want to see what your script is trying to do.

                              I can tell you right now, if ok_to_reset is expressionless and you are resetting it in the Script Action script, and expecting peak_power to see the updated value, it won't work.

                              tunnusT Offline
                              tunnusT Offline
                              tunnus
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #17

                              @toggledbits that wasn’t what I was trying to convey here. Let’s forget script action for a moment as it has no relevance for my finding.

                              What I’m trying to say here is that by merely changing the order of variables (and to be clear, that setup has worked before), my rules are working again. Somehow new builds do not like if expressionless variables are in the middle of regular ones. If they are last in line, all is well. Sounds crazy, but please test.

                              Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT & ZWA-2

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • toggledbitsT Offline
                                toggledbitsT Offline
                                toggledbits
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #18

                                I'll say again, local variables are not processed/evaluated in the same way as global variables. Local variables are only evaluated when the Rule to which they belong is being evaluated (i.e. its triggers are being checked). They are not evaluated when a dependent local variable is changed. When the Rule is evaluated, its local variables, if any, are evaluated before the triggers, and yes, they are evaluated in the order in which they are defined. That is known.

                                Combine this with using a Set Variable action... if you don't check the "Force re-evaluation" checkbox, any other local variables that use the variable being set will not be updated until the Rule is next evaluated. If you check the box, it forces a Rule evaluation, and it is the second evaluation that will update the dependent variables.

                                The Script Action is absolutely relevant in your case, at least from what you've posted, because you apparently still had local variables that are dependent on the local variable that the script was changing, and that was not consistent with my recommendation. The script will not cause the dependent variables to be updated, because there is no "Force re-evaluation" option for the script, and local variables are not dependency-scanned/triggered, as I said above. That means your script action will change the local variable ok_to_reset, but that won't make peak_power change immediately after. That is why I recommended that you make all local variables expressionless when using the Script Action, and do all of the work in the script, none of the work in the local variables' expressions.

                                None of this is new. And again, no changes have been made to how variables (global or local) in any of these recent builds. The earlier changes you mentioned to make isRuleSet() and isRuleEnabled() trigger with the rules they reference (build 25082 -- a long time ago) was a change to the implementation of those functions themselves , but was not in any way a change to the mechanism that handles changes in global expressions.

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

                                tunnusT 2 Replies Last reply
                                0
                                • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                                  I'll say again, local variables are not processed/evaluated in the same way as global variables. Local variables are only evaluated when the Rule to which they belong is being evaluated (i.e. its triggers are being checked). They are not evaluated when a dependent local variable is changed. When the Rule is evaluated, its local variables, if any, are evaluated before the triggers, and yes, they are evaluated in the order in which they are defined. That is known.

                                  Combine this with using a Set Variable action... if you don't check the "Force re-evaluation" checkbox, any other local variables that use the variable being set will not be updated until the Rule is next evaluated. If you check the box, it forces a Rule evaluation, and it is the second evaluation that will update the dependent variables.

                                  The Script Action is absolutely relevant in your case, at least from what you've posted, because you apparently still had local variables that are dependent on the local variable that the script was changing, and that was not consistent with my recommendation. The script will not cause the dependent variables to be updated, because there is no "Force re-evaluation" option for the script, and local variables are not dependency-scanned/triggered, as I said above. That means your script action will change the local variable ok_to_reset, but that won't make peak_power change immediately after. That is why I recommended that you make all local variables expressionless when using the Script Action, and do all of the work in the script, none of the work in the local variables' expressions.

                                  None of this is new. And again, no changes have been made to how variables (global or local) in any of these recent builds. The earlier changes you mentioned to make isRuleSet() and isRuleEnabled() trigger with the rules they reference (build 25082 -- a long time ago) was a change to the implementation of those functions themselves , but was not in any way a change to the mechanism that handles changes in global expressions.

                                  tunnusT Offline
                                  tunnusT Offline
                                  tunnus
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #19

                                  @toggledbits I’m not using script action currently, and those screenshots were from a rule that uses set variable action.

                                  But could you test my finding? Even rule triggers are not relevant when reproducing this finding. Just put a variable referencing an entity which frequently changes as a first one. Then make expressionless variable second, and as a third one make some kind of expression which uses first variable and does some calculation with it. Observe what happens and then swap second and third line and again watch what happens.

                                  Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT & ZWA-2

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                                    I'll say again, local variables are not processed/evaluated in the same way as global variables. Local variables are only evaluated when the Rule to which they belong is being evaluated (i.e. its triggers are being checked). They are not evaluated when a dependent local variable is changed. When the Rule is evaluated, its local variables, if any, are evaluated before the triggers, and yes, they are evaluated in the order in which they are defined. That is known.

                                    Combine this with using a Set Variable action... if you don't check the "Force re-evaluation" checkbox, any other local variables that use the variable being set will not be updated until the Rule is next evaluated. If you check the box, it forces a Rule evaluation, and it is the second evaluation that will update the dependent variables.

                                    The Script Action is absolutely relevant in your case, at least from what you've posted, because you apparently still had local variables that are dependent on the local variable that the script was changing, and that was not consistent with my recommendation. The script will not cause the dependent variables to be updated, because there is no "Force re-evaluation" option for the script, and local variables are not dependency-scanned/triggered, as I said above. That means your script action will change the local variable ok_to_reset, but that won't make peak_power change immediately after. That is why I recommended that you make all local variables expressionless when using the Script Action, and do all of the work in the script, none of the work in the local variables' expressions.

                                    None of this is new. And again, no changes have been made to how variables (global or local) in any of these recent builds. The earlier changes you mentioned to make isRuleSet() and isRuleEnabled() trigger with the rules they reference (build 25082 -- a long time ago) was a change to the implementation of those functions themselves , but was not in any way a change to the mechanism that handles changes in global expressions.

                                    tunnusT Offline
                                    tunnusT Offline
                                    tunnus
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #20

                                    @toggledbits have you had time to look at this? I suspect there’s a bug in evaluating local variables when expressionless variables are not last items in the list

                                    Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT & ZWA-2

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

                                      It works as I would predict.

                                      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
                                      • therealdbT therealdb

                                        Yep, I confirm I had to update a couple of rules where I had similar variables as @tunnus
                                        I used script action because it’s multi line and definitely better in terms of readability.

                                        tunnusT Offline
                                        tunnusT Offline
                                        tunnus
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #22

                                        @therealdb could you test this if you could get your original rules (variables) to work just by rearranging local expressions? My hypothesis being that expressionless variables should be last in the list

                                        Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT & ZWA-2

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • tunnusT Offline
                                          tunnusT Offline
                                          tunnus
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #23

                                          @therealdb & @toggledbits, below you can find my simple test case for this case. At least in my setup I can consistently reproduce this behaviour. (Still) using build 25208.

                                          1. First, make sure you have some device/entity which updates often (not strictly necessary, but it's faster to see the results & differences).
                                          2. Then put "target" variable immediately after "source", and "expressionlessVariable" should be the last one
                                          3. Now "target" should follow/change as "source" changes
                                          4. Next, swap "target" & "expressionlessVariable" (as seen in the image). Save.
                                          5. Now "target" ceases to update

                                          Screenshot 2025-09-05 at 20.40.57.png

                                          Using MSR on Docker (Synology NAS), having InfluxDB, Grafana & Home Assistant, Hubitat C-8, Zigbee2MQTT & ZWA-2

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


                                          Recent Topics

                                          • HA and AI
                                            CatmanV2C
                                            CatmanV2
                                            0
                                            1
                                            34

                                          • How to upgrade from an old version of MSR?
                                            CatmanV2C
                                            CatmanV2
                                            0
                                            6
                                            94

                                          • Access control - allowing anonymous user to dashboard
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            0
                                            2
                                            90

                                          • VEC Virtual Switch Auto Off
                                            S
                                            SweetGenius
                                            1
                                            1
                                            65

                                          • Upcoming Storage Change -- Got Back-ups?
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            3
                                            1
                                            59

                                          • Oddness in Copy/Move of Reactions
                                            G
                                            gwp1
                                            0
                                            1
                                            77

                                          • [Solved] function isRuleEnabled() issue
                                            CrilleC
                                            Crille
                                            0
                                            4
                                            146

                                          • [Reactor] Problem with Global Reactions and groups
                                            therealdbT
                                            therealdb
                                            0
                                            3
                                            147

                                          • Possible feature request 2?
                                            CatmanV2C
                                            CatmanV2
                                            0
                                            3
                                            120

                                          • Reactor (Multi-System/Multi-Hub) Announcements
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            5
                                            133
                                            82.2k

                                          • Genuinely impressed with Zigbee and HA / Reactor
                                            CatmanV2C
                                            CatmanV2
                                            1
                                            9
                                            423

                                          • Copying a global reaction
                                            toggledbitsT
                                            toggledbits
                                            0
                                            3
                                            146
                                          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