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. Logic loop? Throttling...
Error: Command timeout
G
at _ClientAPI._commandTimeout (http://192.168.1.100:8111/client/ClientAPI.js:807:179 Seeing this randomly when returning to open browser tab after being away awhile. Once, maybe twice a day. "What did you do to trigger it?" Literally nothing, just walked away and returned and there it was. Actions taken in reasonably close proximity to this particular instance of it popping up: I'd restarted the MSR container in Portainer. I'll try to grab some logs here shortly.
Multi-System Reactor
Reactor (Multi-System/Multi-Hub) Announcements
toggledbitsT
Build 21228 has been released. Docker images available from DockerHub as usual, and bare-metal packages here. Home Assistant up to version 2021.8.6 supported; the online version of the manual will now state the current supported versions; Fix an error in OWMWeatherController that could cause it to stop updating; Unify the approach to entity filtering on all hub interface classes (controllers); this works for device entities only; it may be extended to other entities later; Improve error detail in messages for EzloController during auth phase; Add isRuleSet() and isRuleEnabled() functions to expressions extensions; Implement set action for lock and passage capabilities (makes them more easily scriptable in some cases); Fix a place in the UI where 24-hour time was not being displayed.
Multi-System Reactor
[Solved] Local expression in Rule does not evaluate as they used to do
CrilleC
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Home Assistant 2025.11.2 and latest-25315
CrilleC
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Notice to Docker + ARM Users (RPi 3/4/5 and others)
toggledbitsT
This post does not apply to users of Intel/AMD-based systems. If you are using a Reactor image tagged latest-amd64 or stable-amd64, then this post does not apply to you. It also does not apply to bare-metal installs; it's for users of docker images on ARM-based systems only (principally Raspberry Pi hosts, but could be others). After January 15, 2026, I will no longer produce the aarch64-tagged docker image for Reactor. The ARM images will be arm64 for 64-bit operating systems, and armv7l for 32-bit operating systems. For those of you running a container from the aarch64 image today, this will be a relatively simple change: you just need to switch the image used for your docker container to a differently-tagged image. If you are using docker-compose, then this is a relatively simple matter of changing the image line in your docker-compose.yaml file and then stopping (docker-compose down) and restarting (docker-compose up -d) your Reactor daemon. But there's a catch... not all of you can safely just switch from the aarch64 image to the arm64 image. And, you can't just trust the output of uname -m, for example, because this exposes the CPU architecture, but not the word size of the OS running on that CPU. For Raspberry Pi systems, the transition to 64-bit operating systems was long (starting in 2016) and not always obvious — although there was a first "official" 64-bit OS for RPis in 2020, it did not become a default recommendation in the Raspberry Pi Imager until 2021, and then that was only the default for Pi 3/4 systems with >4GB RAM; it was 2022 before it was universally recommended for all 64-bit CPUs regardless of RAM size. Depending on when you first imaged your RPi system and what default you may have been offered/chosen, you could today easily have a 64-bit CPU Raspberry Pi running a 32-bit version of the operating system. Upgrades along the way would not change this; changing it to fully 64-bit requires a full reimage of the system. To establish if your OS is 64- or 32-bit, log in to your Pi and run: sudo dpkg-architecture -q DEB_HOST_ARCH. If the response is arm64 or aarch64, then you are running a 64-bit OS and you should use the arm64-tagged image. If it's anything else, you are running a 32-bit OS, and you should use the armv7l-tagged image. pi@rpi4-1:~ $ sudo dpkg-architecture -q DEB_HOST_ARCH armhf pi@rpi4-1:~ $ uname -m aarch64 pi@rpi4-1:~ $ In the example above, the uname command reports that the CPU is 64-bit architecture (aarch64), which is true for the host on which I ran these commands, but the DEB_HOST_ARCH value is armhf, indicating a 32-bit operating system. This system has to use the armv7l-tagged image. Other systems will have their own ways of determining the word size of the running OS. Since the majority of Reactor users running ARM systems are on Raspberry Pis, I am able to supply the above instructions, but if you happen to have a different ARM system, you'll need to do some web searching to figure out how to expose that information. Or, you can just try the arm64 image, and if it doesn't start up, try the armv7l image. Remember to always back up your system before making any changes. For everyone, please make this change as soon as possible, and if you have any trouble finding a working image, please (1) go back to the current aarch64 image; and (2) let me know in this thread along with as much detail about your host system as you can offer (including the output of the dpkg-architecture command mentioned above).
Multi-System Reactor
Requesting a proper ARM64/aarch64 Docker image (Pi 5 support)
M
Hi, I'm in the process of migrating from a Raspberry Pi 4 (ARMv7) to a Raspberry Pi 5 (ARMv8/aarch64), but I’ve run into an issue: there is no proper ARMv8/aarch64 image available. None of the existing images run on the Pi 5 - they all exit immediately with code 139 (segmentation fault), which typically indicates that the binaries inside the image are not compatible with the ARM64/aarch64 architecture used by the Pi 5. Would it be possible to publish a correct ARMv8/aarch64 (linux/arm64) image? Building one should be relatively straightforward using docker buildx with multi-arch support. For example, my own Node.js images are built this way: docker buildx build --push \ -t <localrepo>/<project>:<tag> \ --platform=linux/arm64,linux/amd64 \ --file ./apps/<project>/Dockerfile . This produces both the AMD64 and ARM64/v8 variants automatically. Also, as a side note, it may be best to avoid using Alpine as the base image for the ARM64 build, since musl-based builds often cause compatibility issues and unnecessary headaches. A glibc-based base image (e.g., Debian or Ubuntu) tends to work far more reliably on ARM64, especially for Node.js applications. @toggledbits - tagging you in case you missed this. Thanks, mgvra
Multi-System Reactor
Script action and custom timers
therealdbT
Sorry to write here without trying, but I’m flying today. Am I correct if i say that script action with alarm() makes it possible to execute a reaction in a given interval, lets say 15 seconds or 3.5 minutes? That sounds amazing, since I’ve used weird tricks, including a custom controller, just to do this.
Multi-System Reactor
Help resolve change in behaviour post update
CatmanV2C
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Reactor w/HA 2025.11 error on set_datetime service call setting only time
CrilleC
@toggledbits Do you know if this is related to that PR or is it a change they made in 2025.11.1? [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.319Z <HassController:INFO> HassController#hass perform x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_dag with { "time": "10:45" } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.320Z <HassController:INFO> HassController#hass: sending payload for x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_dag action: { "type": "call_service", "service_data": { "date": (null), "time": "10:45", "datetime": (null), "timestamp": (null) }, "domain": "input_datetime", "service": "set_datetime", "target": { "entity_id": "input_datetime.vvb_dag" } } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.321Z <HassController:ERR> HassController#hass request 1762866984320<2025-11-11 14:16:24> (call_service) failed: [Error] Not a parseable type for dictionary value @ data['date'] [-] [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.321Z <HassController:WARN> HassController#hass action x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime({ "time": "10:45" }) on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_dag failed! [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.321Z <HassController:INFO> Service call payload: {"type":"call_service","service_data":{"date":null,"time":"10:45","datetime":null,"timestamp":null},"domain":"input_datetime","service":"set_datetime","target":{"entity_id":"input_datetime.vvb_dag"},"id":1762866984320} [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.322Z <HassController:INFO> Service data: {"fields":{"date":{"example":"\"2019-04-20\"","selector":{"text":{"multiline":false,"multiple":false}}},"time":{"example":"\"05:04:20\"","selector":{"time":{}}},"datetime":{"example":"\"2019-04-20 05:04:20\"","selector":{"text":{"multiline":false,"multiple":false}}},"timestamp":{"selector":{"number":{"min":0,"max":9223372036854776000,"mode":"box","step":1}}}},"target":{"entity":[{"domain":["input_datetime"]}]}} [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.322Z <Engine:ERR> Engine#1 reaction rule-mgb8pfhs:S step 0 perform x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime failed: [Error] Not a parseable type for dictionary value @ data['date'] [-] [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.322Z <Engine:INFO> Engine#1 action args: { "time": "10:45" } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.322Z <Engine:INFO> Resuming reaction Sätt Schema VVB i Home Assistant<AKTIV> (rule-mgb8pfhs:S) from step 1 [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.323Z <HassController:INFO> HassController#hass perform x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_natt with { "time": "03:00", "timestamp": 0 } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.323Z <HassController:INFO> HassController#hass: sending payload for x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_natt action: { "type": "call_service", "service_data": { "date": (null), "time": "03:00", "datetime": (null), "timestamp": 0 }, "domain": "input_datetime", "service": "set_datetime", "target": { "entity_id": "input_datetime.vvb_natt" } } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <HassController:ERR> HassController#hass request 1762866984323<2025-11-11 14:16:24> (call_service) failed: [Error] Not a parseable type for dictionary value @ data['date'] [-] [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <HassController:WARN> HassController#hass action x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime({ "time": "03:00", "timestamp": 0 }) on Entity#hass>input_datetime_vvb_natt failed! [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <HassController:INFO> Service call payload: {"type":"call_service","service_data":{"date":null,"time":"03:00","datetime":null,"timestamp":0},"domain":"input_datetime","service":"set_datetime","target":{"entity_id":"input_datetime.vvb_natt"},"id":1762866984323} [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <HassController:INFO> Service data: {"fields":{"date":{"example":"\"2019-04-20\"","selector":{"text":{"multiline":false,"multiple":false}}},"time":{"example":"\"05:04:20\"","selector":{"time":{}}},"datetime":{"example":"\"2019-04-20 05:04:20\"","selector":{"text":{"multiline":false,"multiple":false}}},"timestamp":{"selector":{"number":{"min":0,"max":9223372036854776000,"mode":"box","step":1}}}},"target":{"entity":[{"domain":["input_datetime"]}]}} [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <Engine:ERR> Engine#1 reaction rule-mgb8pfhs:S step 1 perform x_hass_input_datetime.set_datetime failed: [Error] Not a parseable type for dictionary value @ data['date'] [-] [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.324Z <Engine:INFO> Engine#1 action args: { "time": "03:00", "timestamp": 0 } [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.325Z <Engine:INFO> Resuming reaction Sätt Schema VVB i Home Assistant<AKTIV> (rule-mgb8pfhs:S) from step 2 [latest-25310]2025-11-11T13:16:24.325Z <Engine:INFO> Sätt Schema VVB i Home Assistant<AKTIV> all actions completed.
Multi-System Reactor
Reactor Version 25310 : Office Light control via rule in reactor no longer working since last update.
P
Hello, I currently have an office light (connected via a Leviton Zwave Dimmer switch) controlled from a Gen5 Aeotech Zwave switch installed on my Synology 720+ NAS. I run HA(2025.11.10) in a virtual machine from my NAS and Reactor on the container manager of the same NAS. Prior to updating to 25304 the rule I had set to turn the light on to a specific dimming value worked correctly. Now the rule appears to follow the decision tree, however the reaction does not trigger setting the dimming or turning on the office light? Strangely I can still turn the light on and off as well as dim it directly from HASS..? I have tried using the ''try this action'' button in the rules reaction setting and it will not control the light and does not throw an error flagÉ Please help, P.S Reactor has been rock steady for me over the last few years and I'm a big fan of this solution.
Multi-System Reactor
[Solved] alarm() in global expression throws error in log.
CrilleC
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[Solved] Define function issue in latest-25304
CrilleC
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
No Upgrade Notification for Build 25308?
CatmanV2C
FWIW I'm no longer getting a notification from MSR that there's an update. Just thought I'd mention it C
Multi-System Reactor
Strange behavior in MSR latest-25304 with disabled groups in Reaction
therealdbT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[Reactor] Variables not updating correctly in latest-25201-2aa18550
therealdbT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
The reaction stopped working (Google Nest max playing a video)
F
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
Handling Dead Entities and Renamed Entities
PablaP
Hello all.. been a minute! I recently rebuilt my Z wave network and migrated to a new z wave stick. In order to prevent any downtime I kept my original z wave network up and ran a docker version of Z Wave JS UI with my new controller. This way I could add device by device without having any devices down. I finally moved all the devices over to my new stick today. The final step was to migrate everything from my Docker instance of Z Wave JS UI to the HA add-on of Z Wave JS UI. However during this migration some of the names didn't populate correctly which I later managed to import back into Z Wave JS UI. The issue was in Reactor it is stuck on the default names and the entities are not updating. I removed the controller from Reactor, restarted, hard refreshed, and added the controller back however the new entity names have not updated. Also it seems like the old entities from my previous instance of Z Wave JS UI are lingering and not being marked as dead (I believe a certain amount of time needs to lapse before they're marked as dead in Reactor). My goal is to basically purge all the entities for the 'ZWaveJS' controller in Reactor so it can pull all the updated entity names and only the entities that exist in Z Wave JS UI. I cannot find a quick way to do this, I know entities can be deleted one by one, but with over 100 entities this would take long I am guessing that if I added the controller with a new name in in the Reactor config it would pull the updated entities and names but I think that would break my rules since the entity IDs would change (I made sure to name all the entities the exact same as they were previously to prevent this issue).
Multi-System Reactor
Strange behavior for MQTT templates using payload and attributes
therealdbT
Topic thumbnail image
Multi-System Reactor
[MSR] reactor-mqtt-contrib package for additional MQTT templates
therealdbT
I'm slowly migrating all my stuff to MQTT under MSR, so I have a central place to integrate everything (and, in a not-so-distant future, to remove virtual devices from my Vera and leave it running zwave only). Anyway, here's my reactor-mqtt-contrib package: https://github.com/dbochicchio/reactor-mqtt-contrib Simply download yaml files (everything or just the ones you need) and you're good to go. I have mapped my most useful devices, but I'll add others soon. Feel free to ask for specific templates, since I've worked a lot in the last weeks to understand and operate them. The templates are supporting both init and query, so you have always up-to-date devices at startup, and the ability to poll them. Online status is supported as well, so you can get disconnected devices with a simple expression. Many-many thanks to @toggledbits for its dedication, support, and patience with me and my requests
Multi-System Reactor
HA 2025.9.4 Supported Yet?
CatmanV2C
Tangentially did I miss 2025.9.4 getting blessed in MSR? I've been holding off Cheers C
Multi-System Reactor

Logic loop? Throttling...

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Multi-System Reactor
11 Posts 2 Posters 1.1k 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.
  • wmarcolinW Offline
    wmarcolinW Offline
    wmarcolin
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Hi Patrick! @toggledbits

    I don't remember before version 21277 receiving this kind of message.

    dbea16f0-39f8-475a-bee8-8899069f2db3-image.png

    This is in the log, this warning appears hundreds of times, every 1 second it repeats.

    [latest-21281]2021-10-10T16:13:46.107Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
    [latest-21281]2021-10-10T16:13:46.482Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
    [latest-21281]2021-10-10T16:13:46.835Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...

    As you can see, the rule that has generated this warning is run on demand at 10am, where the information is loaded into local variables, and then I use it to send the information by Telegram, only once a day.

    5d55901a-bcbe-4cd6-8989-01d7a0ff9c67-image.png

    I started using this matchEntities() instruction recently when it was made available, and I see you have been making recent adjustments. Wouldn't this situation of continuing to evaluate be related?

    I will turn the rule off, so as not to generate this situation that surely damages the functioning of the MSR, and I look forward to your comments please.

    Thanks

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • toggledbitsT Offline
      toggledbitsT Offline
      toggledbits
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Update to 21281. It would be great if everyone would make sure they are on the latest release before reporting problems.

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

      wmarcolinW 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • toggledbitsT toggledbits

        Update to 21281. It would be great if everyone would make sure they are on the latest release before reporting problems.

        wmarcolinW Offline
        wmarcolinW Offline
        wmarcolin
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        @toggledbits master I am already with version 21281, the error started at 21277.

        7b2ad594-81c0-4d52-9844-9d10e6b1da57-image.png

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • toggledbitsT Offline
          toggledbitsT Offline
          toggledbits
          wrote on last edited by toggledbits
          #4

          Sigh. Sorry, I'm running fast today... way too fast, much on my plate.

          So looking at what you've done... I would not do it this way. Put those expressions in the variables they are meant to manipulate.

          Also, your matchEntities() for BatterySensor, you should not include level. That is an attribute of the capability battery_power, and since we're matching capabilities, it won't match anything and creates needless work. You can list capabilities here, but not attributes. All attributes of the capability come with the capability. Same for FaultSensor: remove failed; it's an attribute, not a capability.

          And please, when posting log snippets, showing me just the error is one line away from showing me nothing. I need to see several dozen lines from before the error for context.

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

          wmarcolinW 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • toggledbitsT toggledbits

            Sigh. Sorry, I'm running fast today... way too fast, much on my plate.

            So looking at what you've done... I would not do it this way. Put those expressions in the variables they are meant to manipulate.

            Also, your matchEntities() for BatterySensor, you should not include level. That is an attribute of the capability battery_power, and since we're matching capabilities, it won't match anything and creates needless work. You can list capabilities here, but not attributes. All attributes of the capability come with the capability. Same for FaultSensor: remove failed; it's an attribute, not a capability.

            And please, when posting log snippets, showing me just the error is one line away from showing me nothing. I need to see several dozen lines from before the error for context.

            wmarcolinW Offline
            wmarcolinW Offline
            wmarcolin
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            @toggledbits master, as you instructed, I believe this is the correct way to do it, and apparently, the error is gone.

            067eabd9-a914-43c2-be57-b2b210d46741-image.png

            Thanks!

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • toggledbitsT Offline
              toggledbitsT Offline
              toggledbits
              wrote on last edited by toggledbits
              #6

              LOL! OK. Yes, this is better structure-wise. It is much less efficient to use SetVariable to accomplish what is effectively the same as putting the expressions on the variables as you have now done.

              I did replicate your prior structure on my system to try it out, but I was unable to replicate the throttling. Nonetheless, I think I understand why it would have happened... and I'm guessing you have significantly more devices on your system than I have on my development system (maybe, I've got about 100 across the four hubs I use for development). I can see why it would throttle, I just could not make it do it. Nonetheless, I'm going to see what I can do about preventing it, based on my assumption about how it happened for you.

              Another thing... mentioned in another thread is a small step up you could take in efficiency in BatteryMSG: you are doing getEntity() twice on the same ID. You can improve on that by using a temporary variable inside the loop to store the getEntity() result, and use that temporary variable in the string assembly:

              join( each id in BatteryLow: do
                  e = getEntity( id ),
                  e.name + " " + int( e.attributes.battery_power.level * 100 ) + "%"
              done, ', ' )
              

              The do...done block looks like a single expression to each. The result of a do...done block is the result of the last expression executed within it. That block contains two expressions, the first being the e = getEntity() which does the lookup and stores the value in a temporary variable, and the second which uses the temporary variable to build the result string for the entity. This saves you the cycles looking up the same entity twice.

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

              wmarcolinW 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                LOL! OK. Yes, this is better structure-wise. It is much less efficient to use SetVariable to accomplish what is effectively the same as putting the expressions on the variables as you have now done.

                I did replicate your prior structure on my system to try it out, but I was unable to replicate the throttling. Nonetheless, I think I understand why it would have happened... and I'm guessing you have significantly more devices on your system than I have on my development system (maybe, I've got about 100 across the four hubs I use for development). I can see why it would throttle, I just could not make it do it. Nonetheless, I'm going to see what I can do about preventing it, based on my assumption about how it happened for you.

                Another thing... mentioned in another thread is a small step up you could take in efficiency in BatteryMSG: you are doing getEntity() twice on the same ID. You can improve on that by using a temporary variable inside the loop to store the getEntity() result, and use that temporary variable in the string assembly:

                join( each id in BatteryLow: do
                    e = getEntity( id ),
                    e.name + " " + int( e.attributes.battery_power.level * 100 ) + "%"
                done, ', ' )
                

                The do...done block looks like a single expression to each. The result of a do...done block is the result of the last expression executed within it. That block contains two expressions, the first being the e = getEntity() which does the lookup and stores the value in a temporary variable, and the second which uses the temporary variable to build the result string for the entity. This saves you the cycles looking up the same entity twice.

                wmarcolinW Offline
                wmarcolinW Offline
                wmarcolin
                wrote on last edited by wmarcolin
                #7

                @toggledbits hi my friend!

                The warning message has appeared again.

                5f36db72-ab37-4b81-aff7-532ede046146-image.png

                Looking at the log, it is not an error, this message appears several times intermittently, only being interrupted when another action occurs.

                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:30:35.222Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:10.561Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:10.695Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:11.054Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:12.810Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) SET!
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:22.152Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:33:15.364Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) RESET!
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:33:55.112Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:34:29.630Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) SET!
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:27.808Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:40.960Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:41.809Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:50.185Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...

                Here is another cut of the log, 45 minutes later the warnings follow.

                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:04.876Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:05.201Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:05.389Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...

                I will stop the task again, I am concerned, even though a safe warning is consuming MSR processing.

                A topic that catches my attention. The action is scheduled to run on my schedule from 8:00am to 8:05am (-5), and because it is a local variable, it should not be updated outside this time, is my understanding.

                If it is a global variable, the update is recurrent, because it is active 24 hours, now why is an action with a defined time, and local variable still being executed in a loop?

                toggledbitsT 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • wmarcolinW wmarcolin

                  @toggledbits hi my friend!

                  The warning message has appeared again.

                  5f36db72-ab37-4b81-aff7-532ede046146-image.png

                  Looking at the log, it is not an error, this message appears several times intermittently, only being interrupted when another action occurs.

                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:30:35.222Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:10.561Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:10.695Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:11.054Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:12.810Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) SET!
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:32:22.152Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:33:15.364Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) RESET!
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:33:55.112Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:34:29.630Z Rule:INFO Internal Motion (Rule#rule-kpq9tnbr) SET!
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:27.808Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:40.960Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:41.809Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T13:35:50.185Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...

                  Here is another cut of the log, 45 minutes later the warnings follow.

                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:04.876Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:05.201Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...
                  [latest-21281]2021-10-12T14:16:05.389Z Rule:WARN Rule#rule-ku32lfti (Warning (93) Devices) update rate 61/min exceeds limit (60/min)! Logic loop? Throttling...

                  I will stop the task again, I am concerned, even though a safe warning is consuming MSR processing.

                  A topic that catches my attention. The action is scheduled to run on my schedule from 8:00am to 8:05am (-5), and because it is a local variable, it should not be updated outside this time, is my understanding.

                  If it is a global variable, the update is recurrent, because it is active 24 hours, now why is an action with a defined time, and local variable still being executed in a loop?

                  toggledbitsT Offline
                  toggledbitsT Offline
                  toggledbits
                  wrote on last edited by toggledbits
                  #8

                  @wmarcolin said in Logic loop? Throttling...:

                  A topic that catches my attention. The action is scheduled to run on my schedule from 8:00am to 8:05am (-5), and because it is a local variable, it should not be updated outside this time, is my understanding.

                  That's incorrect. Any changes to a watched device will cause the rule to re-evaluate. The first step in re-evaluating the rule is re-evaluating all of the rule's expressions; only after that are the conditions then evaluated, because the conditions may reference the rule's variables. This is documented behavior. So given that you may be doing a getEntity() on several dozen, or hundred, devices, you are making that rule subject to re-evaluation any time any of those devices changes, for any reason. Reactor does not "see through" to the attribute you are eventually referring to; it does not and could not (reasonably) do that.

                  To reduce the evaluation rate of the rule, you'd have to make your expressions global. There is (currently) no throttling on the evaluation of global expressions, and they evaluate/update much faster than rules. I suggest you move all of your expressions that perform getEntity() on the result of matchEntities() into global expressions; specifically, I mean BatterySensor which creates the battery-operated device array, and BatteryLow which checks and evaluates (using getEntity()) the battery level of each matching device in BatterySensor, and BatteryMSG which builds the text from BatteryLow. You can then use an Expression Value condition in your rule to check the value of BatteryMSG for a non-empty string. This will be the most efficient setup for the potentially large number of devices these expressions have to sift through.

                  The same method should be applied to FaultSensor and its progeny.

                  I would also update to 21286.

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

                  wmarcolinW 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                    @wmarcolin said in Logic loop? Throttling...:

                    A topic that catches my attention. The action is scheduled to run on my schedule from 8:00am to 8:05am (-5), and because it is a local variable, it should not be updated outside this time, is my understanding.

                    That's incorrect. Any changes to a watched device will cause the rule to re-evaluate. The first step in re-evaluating the rule is re-evaluating all of the rule's expressions; only after that are the conditions then evaluated, because the conditions may reference the rule's variables. This is documented behavior. So given that you may be doing a getEntity() on several dozen, or hundred, devices, you are making that rule subject to re-evaluation any time any of those devices changes, for any reason. Reactor does not "see through" to the attribute you are eventually referring to; it does not and could not (reasonably) do that.

                    To reduce the evaluation rate of the rule, you'd have to make your expressions global. There is (currently) no throttling on the evaluation of global expressions, and they evaluate/update much faster than rules. I suggest you move all of your expressions that perform getEntity() on the result of matchEntities() into global expressions; specifically, I mean BatterySensor which creates the battery-operated device array, and BatteryLow which checks and evaluates (using getEntity()) the battery level of each matching device in BatterySensor, and BatteryMSG which builds the text from BatteryLow. You can then use an Expression Value condition in your rule to check the value of BatteryMSG for a non-empty string. This will be the most efficient setup for the potentially large number of devices these expressions have to sift through.

                    The same method should be applied to FaultSensor and its progeny.

                    I would also update to 21286.

                    wmarcolinW Offline
                    wmarcolinW Offline
                    wmarcolin
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    @toggledbits ok master, I will download version 21286, move these expressions to global variables, and come back tomorrow after operating 24 hours with the changes.

                    I really worry about not having actions that are exhaustively generating processing.

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

                      When you train a rule or expression on a large number of devices, you're going to get activity when those devices change, and that can be a lot. There's more activity than you know, normally. Not everything gets logged at the default level. 21286 does contain a bit more logging.

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

                      wmarcolinW 2 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • toggledbitsT toggledbits

                        When you train a rule or expression on a large number of devices, you're going to get activity when those devices change, and that can be a lot. There's more activity than you know, normally. Not everything gets logged at the default level. 21286 does contain a bit more logging.

                        wmarcolinW Offline
                        wmarcolinW Offline
                        wmarcolin
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        @toggledbits your suggestion worked perfectly!!

                        With the version updated to 21286, moving all rules to the Global variable, the warnings ended, and I can see in the log that the action started to be invoked only at the given times, and the variable update as Global occurs only when there is an effective change in the device.

                        Great knowledge exercise and one more lesson from you.

                        Thanks @toggledbits !

                        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

                        • Error: Command timeout
                          G
                          gwp1
                          0
                          6
                          109

                        • Reactor (Multi-System/Multi-Hub) Announcements
                          toggledbitsT
                          toggledbits
                          5
                          131
                          74.6k

                        • [Solved] Local expression in Rule does not evaluate as they used to do
                          CrilleC
                          Crille
                          0
                          5
                          191

                        • Home Assistant 2025.11.2 and latest-25315
                          G
                          gwp1
                          0
                          6
                          221

                        • Notice to Docker + ARM Users (RPi 3/4/5 and others)
                          toggledbitsT
                          toggledbits
                          1
                          1
                          76

                        • Requesting a proper ARM64/aarch64 Docker image (Pi 5 support)
                          M
                          mgvra
                          1
                          3
                          172

                        • Script action and custom timers
                          toggledbitsT
                          toggledbits
                          0
                          4
                          187

                        • Help resolve change in behaviour post update
                          CatmanV2C
                          CatmanV2
                          0
                          12
                          498

                        • There is an alternative to homebridge-mqttthing
                          akbooerA
                          akbooer
                          1
                          2
                          148

                        • Reactor w/HA 2025.11 error on set_datetime service call setting only time
                          CrilleC
                          Crille
                          0
                          6
                          223

                        • Reactor Version 25310 : Office Light control via rule in reactor no longer working since last update.
                          toggledbitsT
                          toggledbits
                          0
                          17
                          634

                        • Shelly Wall Display XL
                          akbooerA
                          akbooer
                          2
                          9
                          923
                        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