Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Multiple z-troller question: choosing "(automatic)" for "Z-Wave Interface to Use:"?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Multiple z-troller question: choosing "(automatic)" for "Z-Wave Interface to Use:"?

    How smart is it? Does the "(automatic)" setting cause the z-troller with the best signal link for that device to be chosen? Or, does it do some kind of load balancing (e.g. assigning an approximately equal number of devices to each z-troller in the multiple z-troller network)? Or both? Or something else entirely?

    Also, how do I know which z-troller ultimately got assigned to the device by the "(automatic)" setting?

    #2
    Good question. I'd like to know that as well. I have been manually setting my devices.

    Sent from my SCH-R970X using Tapatalk 4
    HS4Pro Running on a Raspberry Pi4
    72 Z-Wave Nodes, 111 Events, 422 Devices
    Z-Wave, UPB, WiFi
    Plugins: EasyTrigger, weatherXML, OMNI, Z-Wave, Tuya, Device History
    HSTouch Clients: 3 Android, 1 Joggler

    Comment


      #3
      I just tried it. If you set it to automatic and then do a "Full Optimize Network", it actually does do a smart thing: it tries each z-troller interface to see which one has the best connectivity to the device. It then assigns that z-troller to the device. You can see which it picked because (Automatic) is no longer selected in the picklist. Instead, the z-troller that it picked shows up in the picklist.

      Cool!

      Here's the log for one of the nodes during optimization:

      9/12/2013 4:48:41 PM - Z-Wave - Optimization of node 4 successfully started...
      9/12/2013 4:48:48 PM - Z-Wave - Device 4, Z-Wave Z-Wave Exhaust on-off successfully optimized.
      9/12/2013 4:48:48 PM - Z-Wave - Testing all remote interfaces to determine most reliable one for this device...
      9/12/2013 4:48:48 PM - Z-Wave - Testing communications with primary interface for node 4 (Z-Wave Z-Wave Exhaust on-off)
      9/12/2013 4:48:49 PM - Z-Wave - Testing communications with remote interface 5 (Spa) for node 4 (Z-Wave Z-Wave Exhaust on-off)
      9/12/2013 4:48:49 PM - Z-Wave - Enabling instant status for Z-Wave device Z-Wave Z-Wave Exhaust on-off (4)
      9/12/2013 4:48:49 PM - Z-Wave - Return route queued to be added from node 4 to 1
      9/12/2013 4:48:52 PM - Z-Wave - Return route queued to be added from node 4 to 5
      9/12/2013 4:48:54 PM - Z-Wave - Return route queued to be added from node 4 to 1
      9/12/2013 4:48:57 PM - Z-Wave - Return route queued to be added from node 4 to 5
      9/12/2013 4:49:03 PM - Z-Wave - Removing and Adding Return Routes for Device 4, Z-Wave Z-Wave Exhaust on-off...
      9/12/2013 4:49:03 PM - Z-Wave - Return route queued to be added from node 4 to 1
      9/12/2013 4:49:06 PM - Z-Wave - Return route queued to be added from node 4 to 5
      9/12/2013 4:49:08 PM - Z-Wave - Removing and Adding Return Routes for Device 4, Z-Wave Z-Wave Exhaust on-off: Result=Successful

      In this particular case, I happen to already know which z-troller has better connectivity to the device, and the above optimization picked the right one: not the primary interface, but rather the remote interface.

      This should come in very handy when it isn't obvious which z-troller would be the better match.

      So, to whoever wrote the code: nice work!
      Last edited by NeverDie; September 12, 2013, 05:18 PM.

      Comment


        #4
        As noted elsewhere, though, the other aspects of "Full Optimize Network" remain broken for a multi-z-troller system. Is there a workaround other than manually optimizing each node individually?

        Comment

        Working...
        X