⛔ Event - "Has been for at least" value no longer supported?

[dannieboiz]

Playing around with an event and noticed this message.... is this intentional?

[randy]

I think it is a good idea to eliminate that trigger as it is one that really can bring a system to its knees. You can do the same thing with a recurring trigger and the condition



When I built this test Event, I discovered another problem that was reported in earlier versions. When the Condition is collapsed, it shows Value instead of Status as it does when expanded.



That being said, hopefully it will continue to work on existing HS3 events ported to HS4 until we can edit them. .

[dannieboiz]

You read my mind... just needed virtual devices to update properly. Is there any downside to having multiple retriggering events constantly? I imagine with enough of it, it's going to slow the system down?

[gregdeux]

you see its that my idea that I had to show on the screen when an event is triggered or it works with a point or simply the color of this event which changes would be great
at least we could quickly see the event that consumes the most ;-)

[kriz83]

I think it is a good idea to eliminate that trigger as it is one that really can bring a system to its knees

I do not fully agree with this.

Take for example a Z-Wave node that heats my bed. I have it auto shut off if it is on for longer than 2hours (because then probably I forgot to turn it off). However, the reception is sometimes bad. Using the 'has been/for at least', I am sure it retries turning the thing off every minute untill it is successfull.

Offcourse I had the 'does not retrigger for' set to 1 min

EDIT: does this break a system when updating? This has been in for years, why remove it now ?

[sparkman]

I think it is a good idea to eliminate that trigger as it is one that really can bring a system to its knees. You can do the same thing with a recurring trigger and the condition

I use it for many events and have done so for a long time and it’s never brought my system to its knees.

I purposely have avoided using the recurring trigger events as there was a long standing bug that caused those types of events to trigger many times at startup. That did bring my system to its knees many times, so I eliminated most of them. The bug has been fixed for a while now, but I’m not interested in redoing a whole bunch of events over again to go to HS4.

[logman]

There are currently many ways to build loops into events that can shut the system down. If we start eliminating all of them then we'll be left with a hamstrung event engine. I'd rather see a "Caution: Use With Care" hyperlink populate beneath the trigger that leads to an explanation with examples.

--Barry

[randy]

I use it for many events and have done so for a long time and it’s never brought my system to its knees.

I purposely have avoided using the recurring trigger events as there was a long standing bug that caused those types of events to trigger many times at startup. That did bring my system to its knees many times, so I eliminated most of them.

No, because you are experienced enough to know there needs to be a limiting condition or Cannot re-run set on any event that uses that trigger. I have helped a half dozen or so people who end up with run away events that retrigger once a second due to the “at least” trigger. The ones that choked the system were events that used a delayed device or delayed event action. One had over 10,000 delayed device actions, because the delay was about 8 hours. Almost all of them didn’t realize that becomes a one second recurring trigger when true. Using a one second recurring trigger with an at least condition is functionally the same, now that the bug as been gone for several years. Personally I use the at least trigger a lot and it serves me well. I was just offering a suggestion as to why they might try to eliminate it. If eliminating that trigger breaks current HS3 events when imported, it is a huge mistake.

[randy]

You read my mind... just needed virtual devices to update properly. Is there any downside to having multiple retriggering events constantly? I imagine with enough of it, it's going to slow the system down?

I don’t believe a successful trigger adds to the system overhead, unless the conditions are met and the actions are run.

[kriz83]

Was this in the release notes by the way ?
I'd rather stop losing any more functionality ...

[Guest]

Nop...and not the first time they do that sort of thing

[kriz83]

macromark jseer Is support for this dropped ?

[macromark]

it was deemed to be a condition, not a trigger. that's why it was removed from the trigger list. People were creating events with it that would continuously fire.

[sirmeili]

This is sad and I use this especially for my front door lock where I want it to retry every minute until the door locks. Sometimes the door has bad reception. A condition will not allow me to do this.

As stated, a warning or enabling as an advanced option would be a much better option instead of programming to the lowest denominator.

[sirmeili]

No, because you are experienced enough to know there needs to be a limiting condition or Cannot re-run set on any event that uses that trigger. I have helped a half dozen or so people who end up with run away events that retrigger once a second due to the “at least” trigger. The ones that choked the system were events that used a delayed device or delayed event action. One had over 10,000 delayed device actions, because the delay was about 8 hours. Almost all of them didn’t realize that becomes a one second recurring trigger when true. Using a one second recurring trigger with an at least condition is functionally the same, now that the bug as been gone for several years. Personally I use the at least trigger a lot and it serves me well. I was just offering a suggestion as to why they might try to eliminate it. If eliminating that trigger breaks current HS3 events when imported, it is a huge mistake.

We shouldn't be dumbing the system down to the lowest common denominator. If we do that, HS4 will just as bad as some of the really cheap options out there, but cost a lot more (Which means, what would the benefit be of having it).

When I got HS3, it was a $250 product for standard. There are hubs that cost far less. The benefit for the cost was that it was supposed to be "Advanced". If they remove all that to dumb it down, why would I buy it over anything else?