Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Official 5.4 Beta Discussion Thread
#31
Actually, it turns out that I had already written a specific handler for the Linear/GoControl WAZ dual thingie. It wouldn't even work with the new dual binary sensor handler I wrote anyway, since it's even more badly designed than that. It doesn't even use separate command classes for the two sensors.

But something I'm obviously not getting if it's not working. We need to get a trace of both sensors going to open and closed states so that I can see exactly what it's reporting. I just can't quite tell for sure from the docs what to expect.
Dean Roddey
Software Geek Extraordinaire
Reply
#32
For the next drop, for power users, I updated the action editor such that, when the focus is in one of the parameter entry fields, you can do Ctrl-F or Ctrl-D to bring up the field or driver moniker selection dialogs, for insertion into the parameter. You can do this via the popup menu, but this makes it faster for the power user type for this fairly common scenario.
Dean Roddey
Software Geek Extraordinaire
Reply
#33
(07-13-2018, 02:58 PM)Dean Roddey Wrote: Actually, it turns out that I had already written a specific handler for the Linear/GoControl WAZ dual thingie. It wouldn't even work with the new dual binary sensor handler I wrote anyway, since it's even more badly designed than that. It doesn't even use separate command classes for the two sensors.

But something I'm obviously not getting if it's not working. We need to get a trace of both sensors going to open and closed states so that I can see exactly what it's reporting. I just can't quite tell for sure from the docs what to expect.

Dean, I can't get a trace until the zwave driver is usable for something beyond a few devices.  Leaving the driver on for any length of time none of the devices that are enabled respond consistently wired, lock or battery type. I can get the WADWAZ to register open / close very inconsistently thus not possible to provide a trace.

(07-10-2018, 10:45 AM)Dean Roddey Wrote: The thing is, it seems to be reacting to all of the units. But the first time you run the client interface after loading the driver the client interface won't know about all of the units. It can't know that until you do the first replication. So it seems like it would have to be at least after you have done a replication.

BTW, I was doing some thinking last night, when I should have been sleeping. When the driver hands off an outgoing msg to the Z-Stick, there are two scenarios. It can just wait for the Z-Stick to acknowledge that it has queued the msg, or it can wait for the Z-Stick to announce that it has actually transmitted the msg. 

My strategy, for maximum speed and overlap has been to do the former for queries and the latter for outgoing commands. For queries, we don't wait around for the result. We send it, and at some point it either sends the response or it doesn't and we time out and try again (if that's appropriate.)  So there's no real need to wait around for it to be transmitted. As long as we know it's queued to be sent its fine.

But, I got to wondering that maybe I'm overrunning the Z-Sticks buffer on your systems because you have more units than me, and likely its straining a bit more to get then transmitted so there may be more re-tries which allows more time for other queries to be queued up.

So I think, as a sanity check, I should try sending all msgs in the wait for actual transmission style. That way we know we aren't going to overcook the Z-Stick. It'll be a bit slower, but safer. If it makes absolutely no difference, I can go back again easily enough. If it makes it a lot better, I'll keep that and just get rid of the option so that that decision doesn't even have to be made by the code.

When will a drop be available that contains the changes you talked about above?
Reply
#34
I'll work on it tomorrow. I have a WAZ or WAD or WASWAD or Oomplaloompa, or whatever that thingy is, coming in tomorrow. So I can test that out and get it working. Then I'll make the change for the transmission acking and get a drop up. I have some other changes in place as well so I can get those out there also.
Dean Roddey
Software Geek Extraordinaire
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Official 5.4 Release Thread Dean Roddey 0 36 07-05-2018, 12:45 PM
Last Post: Dean Roddey
  Official 5.3 Beta Discussion Thread Dean Roddey 815 47,250 07-05-2018, 12:44 PM
Last Post: Dean Roddey
  Official 5.3 Release Thread Dean Roddey 27 2,711 07-05-2018, 12:44 PM
Last Post: Dean Roddey
  Official 5.2 Beta Discussion Thread Dean Roddey 244 49,559 10-14-2017, 07:57 PM
Last Post: Dean Roddey
  Official 5.2 Beta Release Thread Dean Roddey 13 5,136 10-09-2017, 06:49 PM
Last Post: Dean Roddey
  Official 5.1 Beta Discussion Thread Dean Roddey 453 118,452 05-16-2017, 03:45 PM
Last Post: Dean Roddey
  Official 5.1 Beta Release Thread Dean Roddey 28 12,328 05-12-2017, 05:44 PM
Last Post: Dean Roddey
  Official 5.0 Beta Discussions Dean Roddey 2,019 308,005 11-09-2016, 04:34 PM
Last Post: Dean Roddey
  Official 5.0 Beta Release Thread Dean Roddey 15 10,019 11-01-2016, 10:32 AM
Last Post: Dean Roddey
  How to obtain Beta versions? willsauter 3 2,376 07-15-2016, 04:57 PM
Last Post: willsauter

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)