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

[SOLVED] Rethinking HVAC moving from Reactor (Vera) to MSR

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Multi-System Reactor
18 Posts 2 Posters 1.9k Views 2 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • LibraSunL Offline
    LibraSunL Offline
    LibraSun
    wrote on last edited by LibraSun
    #4

    Give it time, as there is a shallow-but-nonzero learning curve moving from Reactor over to MSR. Let's keep this conversation going until you have things working according to plan. Don't hesitate to post screenshots of your work for us to review.

    My suggestion is to start with "Test Rules" that you build for no particular purpose (certainly not for daily driving of Vera devices!), just to kick the tires with. This is a good way to get a grasp of how Expressions work in particular. I probably create and destroy 3-4 throwaway Test Rules every day, just workshopping different approaches to problems similar to yours.

    G 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • G Offline
      G Offline
      gwp1
      wrote on last edited by gwp1
      #5

      Oh I have made very liberal use of Test rules, believe me lol It's been very helpful. I'll try to pull together some screenshots here shortly. As to Reactor>MSR, yes, there's a slight curve. I've been able to pare down my Reactor device designs considerably using MSR.

      *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.177
      *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

      *HAOS
      Core 2026.1.1
      w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
      FW: v1.1
      SDK: v7.23.1

      *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
      MSR: latest-26011-c621bbc7
      MQTTController: 25139
      ZWave Controller: 25139

      1 Reply Last reply
      1
      • LibraSunL LibraSun

        Give it time, as there is a shallow-but-nonzero learning curve moving from Reactor over to MSR. Let's keep this conversation going until you have things working according to plan. Don't hesitate to post screenshots of your work for us to review.

        My suggestion is to start with "Test Rules" that you build for no particular purpose (certainly not for daily driving of Vera devices!), just to kick the tires with. This is a good way to get a grasp of how Expressions work in particular. I probably create and destroy 3-4 throwaway Test Rules every day, just workshopping different approaches to problems similar to yours.

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

        @librasun b0331912-b953-4db5-a38d-7b09c5d49736-image.png

        This is the high-level architecture. Three arming rules, then the appropriate on/off rules that trigger when the arming criteria are met.

        *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.177
        *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

        *HAOS
        Core 2026.1.1
        w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
        FW: v1.1
        SDK: v7.23.1

        *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
        MSR: latest-26011-c621bbc7
        MQTTController: 25139
        ZWave Controller: 25139

        1 Reply Last reply
        1
        • G Offline
          G Offline
          gwp1
          wrote on last edited by
          #7

          Continuing, there were two SiteSensors in Vera - I've moved the Ambient API one to MSR as noted above with the high-level.

          In Vera, it's easy to turn on and off the SiteSensor for OpenWxMap to reduce API calls based on query results from the Ambient API SiteSensor. There's a ruleset moved into MSR that drives the failover/back.

          642f8c3b-3d19-4bd1-8527-a25ea452cc8f-image.png

          74a35033-5029-4046-bba4-9cb1cc99231d-image.png

          In MSR, however, I cannot turn off the OWM ruleset when Ambient API is driving. The result becomes two sets of data being sent to the t-stats which annoys them.

          Currently, I'm using the SiteSensor for OWM in Vera and the ruleset in MSR for Master failover/back and driving Ambient data to the t-stats.

          *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.177
          *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

          *HAOS
          Core 2026.1.1
          w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
          FW: v1.1
          SDK: v7.23.1

          *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
          MSR: latest-26011-c621bbc7
          MQTTController: 25139
          ZWave Controller: 25139

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • LibraSunL Offline
            LibraSunL Offline
            LibraSun
            wrote on last edited by LibraSun
            #8

            Remember, it's entirely plausible to introduce an expressionless (empty) "Go" variable within any Rule, such that the Rule A "runs" (acts Enabled) with "Go" set to "1", and is barred from running (acting Disabled) with it set to "0".

            To make this setup work, simply have your other Rule B's Set Reaction do a [ Set Expression ] [ = ] [ 0 ] on Rule A's variable "Go", with a [ Set Expression ] [ = ] [ 1 ] in its Reset Reaction. Create a corresponding Trigger condition in Rule A that tests [ Expression Value ] [ == ] [ 1 ], and you should be good to go.

            Does that make sense? Hope it helps!

            NOTE: You can also use true / false values for Go and make your Rule A's Trigger condition check for [isTrue] instead.

            G 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • LibraSunL LibraSun

              Remember, it's entirely plausible to introduce an expressionless (empty) "Go" variable within any Rule, such that the Rule A "runs" (acts Enabled) with "Go" set to "1", and is barred from running (acting Disabled) with it set to "0".

              To make this setup work, simply have your other Rule B's Set Reaction do a [ Set Expression ] [ = ] [ 0 ] on Rule A's variable "Go", with a [ Set Expression ] [ = ] [ 1 ] in its Reset Reaction. Create a corresponding Trigger condition in Rule A that tests [ Expression Value ] [ == ] [ 1 ], and you should be good to go.

              Does that make sense? Hope it helps!

              NOTE: You can also use true / false values for Go and make your Rule A's Trigger condition check for [isTrue] instead.

              G Offline
              G Offline
              gwp1
              wrote on last edited by
              #9

              @librasun Wait, what? Slow pitch this - I've never played with the expressions before.

              *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.177
              *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

              *HAOS
              Core 2026.1.1
              w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
              FW: v1.1
              SDK: v7.23.1

              *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
              MSR: latest-26011-c621bbc7
              MQTTController: 25139
              ZWave Controller: 25139

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • LibraSunL Offline
                LibraSunL Offline
                LibraSun
                wrote on last edited by
                #10

                Before I do (let's save Expressions for very last...), please explain how MSR could "know" which version of the weather sensor you want enabled?? I'll go re-read your posts from the past 24 hours to see if I can ascertain same.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • LibraSunL Offline
                  LibraSunL Offline
                  LibraSun
                  wrote on last edited by LibraSun
                  #11

                  For instance, I heard you say, "I cannot turn off the OWM ruleset (in MSR) when Ambient API is driving". Couldn't its governing Rule just have an extra Constraint condition like:

                  [ Entity Attribute ] [ SiteSensor_156 ] [ x_vera_device.failed ] [ isTRUE ]
                  

                  so that it refrains from execution while Ambient is in good health?

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • G Offline
                    G Offline
                    gwp1
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #12

                    Fair enough on the explanation - I prob made that typical error of not providing the details that I "just know" in my head. 🙂

                    Original Vera setup: two SiteSensors, one for Ambient API, one for OWM API. Ambient is hyper-local (my wx station) and is the daily driver. To save API calls against OWM, the SiteSensor there is set to disabled status normally.

                    If Ambient API call returns zero results, the Master API ruleset sees the failure, changes OWM API SiteSensor to enabled. As the query results from Ambient are blank, it is left in enabled status - and there's only one set of data points going to the t-stats.

                    Once Ambient API call returns regular results again, the Master API ruleset sees the actual data and changes OWM API SiteSensor to disabled again and life is, once again, good for all.

                    Can you define for me "refrains from execution"... are you saying it would not send anything to the t-stats or query the API (or both)?

                    *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.177
                    *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                    *HAOS
                    Core 2026.1.1
                    w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                    FW: v1.1
                    SDK: v7.23.1

                    *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                    MSR: latest-26011-c621bbc7
                    MQTTController: 25139
                    ZWave Controller: 25139

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • LibraSunL Offline
                      LibraSunL Offline
                      LibraSun
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #13

                      From all I see (I just stopped short of saying it explicitly earlier), you're asking, "How can I temporarily stop MSR from sending API requests to OWM?" I don't see an immediate way to set that mechanism's sys_system.state= to false, although that was my initial thought.

                      I think we'll have to ask @toggledbits to advise on best practices here.

                      G 2 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • LibraSunL LibraSun

                        From all I see (I just stopped short of saying it explicitly earlier), you're asking, "How can I temporarily stop MSR from sending API requests to OWM?" I don't see an immediate way to set that mechanism's sys_system.state= to false, although that was my initial thought.

                        I think we'll have to ask @toggledbits to advise on best practices here.

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

                        @librasun I poked at this a bit with what I thought you were getting at. The configuration now (which is a carry-over from Vera Reactor and could prob use some trimming) has the top three rulesets (shown earlier) use to arm the system, ie set the parameters for what qualifies as "I should heat now" or "I should cool now" - and then the five rulesets below are the actual action rules.

                        For instance, if the system "qualifies" for (or is armed) for Cooling then only the two rulesets for Cooling are actionable. Same applies for Heating.

                        Taking what you said earlier, I added a condition to each of the action rulesets as shown in this example:

                        85aed027-5c32-4d64-a0b9-2168f1f7073b-image.png

                        I was missing the reality of the action rulesets still running even though none of the qualifiers/armers were, well, armed. The action rulesets were using the last known datapoints stored in the armers - and that's where things were going amiss.

                        By adding the extra condition to each action ruleset it seems to have quieted - this may be the solution (not pretty, but a solution.)

                        *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.177
                        *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                        *HAOS
                        Core 2026.1.1
                        w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                        FW: v1.1
                        SDK: v7.23.1

                        *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                        MSR: latest-26011-c621bbc7
                        MQTTController: 25139
                        ZWave Controller: 25139

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        • LibraSunL LibraSun

                          From all I see (I just stopped short of saying it explicitly earlier), you're asking, "How can I temporarily stop MSR from sending API requests to OWM?" I don't see an immediate way to set that mechanism's sys_system.state= to false, although that was my initial thought.

                          I think we'll have to ask @toggledbits to advise on best practices here.

                          G Offline
                          G Offline
                          gwp1
                          wrote on last edited by gwp1
                          #15

                          @librasun The arming rules look like this:

                          0e070e1a-1afe-4a22-a702-528632d0deba-image.png

                          In my mind, all of these conditions were rolling down to the action rulesets - which is not true.

                          *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.177
                          *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                          *HAOS
                          Core 2026.1.1
                          w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                          FW: v1.1
                          SDK: v7.23.1

                          *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                          MSR: latest-26011-c621bbc7
                          MQTTController: 25139
                          ZWave Controller: 25139

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • LibraSunL Offline
                            LibraSunL Offline
                            LibraSun
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #16

                            I'm liking what I see. We both know there are always 1000 avenues to "the right answer" but what you've just presented seems reasonable and suited to your original goal(s).

                            G 2 Replies Last reply
                            0
                            • LibraSunL LibraSun

                              I'm liking what I see. We both know there are always 1000 avenues to "the right answer" but what you've just presented seems reasonable and suited to your original goal(s).

                              G Offline
                              G Offline
                              gwp1
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #17

                              @librasun Thanks, and totally agree.

                              My goal is always to keep things as uncomplicated as possible as changes or tweaks later get crazy if you have to edit in multiple places. You ALWAYS miss something somewhere and lose countless hours trying to troubleshoot.

                              *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.177
                              *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                              *HAOS
                              Core 2026.1.1
                              w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                              FW: v1.1
                              SDK: v7.23.1

                              *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                              MSR: latest-26011-c621bbc7
                              MQTTController: 25139
                              ZWave Controller: 25139

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              1
                              • LibraSunL LibraSun

                                I'm liking what I see. We both know there are always 1000 avenues to "the right answer" but what you've just presented seems reasonable and suited to your original goal(s).

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

                                As I'm marking this as [SOLVED] I thought I'd update on how this all ended up playing out:

                                Creation of two API rulesets, one for Ambient, one for OWM, that dump their data into Global Expressions. At issue was how to disable OWM to prevent needless API calls - I ended up doing the maths and making adjustments that this isn't an issue any longer. As such, one API ruleset for each dumping to clearly labeled Global Expressions. Yes, they both call out to their respective APIs but the volume is low enough not to trigger either for overuse.

                                The only gotcha here is to make sure that you include in the rulesets for the secondary (OWM) a Trigger that checks for the primary API to be returning null so you don't have both flavors of rulesets competing for Honeywell's API (which is notoriously cranky) as you set the t-stats.

                                *Hubitat C-7 2.4.3.177
                                *Proxmox VE v8, Beelink MiniPC 12GBs, SSD

                                *HAOS
                                Core 2026.1.1
                                w/ HA Connect ZWA-2
                                FW: v1.1
                                SDK: v7.23.1

                                *Prod MSR in docker/portainer
                                MSR: latest-26011-c621bbc7
                                MQTTController: 25139
                                ZWave Controller: 25139

                                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

                                • Set reaction triggering wrong z-wave device
                                  T
                                  tamorgen
                                  0
                                  19
                                  203

                                • Can you run MSR on Home Assistant OS ?
                                  CatmanV2C
                                  CatmanV2
                                  0
                                  12
                                  212

                                • RPi Alternative: Orange Pi 4 LTS (3GB RAM/16GB eMMC)
                                  toggledbitsT
                                  toggledbits
                                  0
                                  2
                                  1.7k

                                • RPi Alternative: Orange Pi Zero 2 (1GB)
                                  toggledbitsT
                                  toggledbits
                                  2
                                  3
                                  3.5k

                                • RPi Alternative: Libre Computer AML-S905X-CC "Le Potato" (2GB RAM)
                                  toggledbitsT
                                  toggledbits
                                  5
                                  6
                                  3.1k

                                • HA and AI
                                  therealdbT
                                  therealdb
                                  0
                                  4
                                  154

                                • How to upgrade from an old version of MSR?
                                  CatmanV2C
                                  CatmanV2
                                  0
                                  26
                                  474

                                • This trigger no longer working - complaining about the operator needing changing
                                  toggledbitsT
                                  toggledbits
                                  0
                                  18
                                  235

                                • Self test
                                  CatmanV2C
                                  CatmanV2
                                  0
                                  3
                                  122

                                • Access control - allowing anonymous user to dashboard
                                  toggledbitsT
                                  toggledbits
                                  0
                                  2
                                  135

                                • VEC Virtual Switch Auto Off
                                  S
                                  SweetGenius
                                  1
                                  1
                                  95

                                • Upcoming Storage Change -- Got Back-ups?
                                  toggledbitsT
                                  toggledbits
                                  3
                                  1
                                  88
                                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