bpwwer

Good point. In most cases, I don't believe it is, but it should be. Another thing to add to me todo list.

If the node server is proprietary and doesn't grant permissions to modify the code, then yes, creating a new one is the obvious answer. But again, this depends on what the node server developer want to do. Recently one of the developers wanted to stop supporting their node servers and passed them on to someone else to continue supporting them. Most of the PG2 node servers that were abandoned, were ported to PG3 by me since the license allowed for that.

No, that would be a bad assumption. Developers can make the source available or not, depending on how they license the node server. Many free node server do have a fairly permissive license and do make the source code available. And no also to the second question. The license the node server is released under is determined by the node server developer. It would be illegal for a third party to release the source if the developer doesn't allow it. The node server ecosystem isn't really large enough at this point to attract corporate developers so today it's people creating and supporting node servers in their spare time. So of course there's a concern that they might stop supporting their node servers.

Ratings and reviews are a good idea. I'll have to think about how that could work. The formal difference between the stores is supposed to be the expectations of the users. The non-production store was set up to provide developers a way to test both the node server and the actual release process with the expectation that not everything may work. Node servers in the production store are expected to work. Support levels are currently defined exclusively by the developers of the node servers. My personal opinion is that the cost should reflect the expected level of support. The higher the cost, the higher the expectation is for support. Nobody should expect that a node server that is free will have the same level of support as one that cost $100, but again, that's my opinion.

Fair enough. I didn't really answer your questions before. Either the existing node server would need to be modified or a new one would have to be written. PG3(x) can only install node servers that exist in the node server store with one exception. Developers can create and run their own node servers outside of the store. If you are a registered developer, then the answer is yes, otherwise no. But chances of you finding a node server for PG3(x) that is public on Github but not in the store is probably unlikely. Of course you can hire someone to create a node server. Any of the folks that have created node servers could do this. You can scroll through the store and see who has authored the existing node servers. I can't speak to the cost of hiring someone to do this, I'd probably want a minimum of $1500 just because of the time involved. Then there's the question of long term support. It's not easy to support a node server if you don't have the equipment needed to test it. Most of the existing node servers were written by someone who wanted the node server for themselves. We haven't had anyone state that they're looking to hire out creating node servers but some developers have responded to requests to have one created. You're right in that this subject isn't really going to get the attention of existing developers. So starting a topic asking about creating a specific node server would be the way to go. The more details you can provide the better. The alternative is to register as a developer and learn how to create node server's yourself. There are some resources to help with that and the existing developer community is normally pretty helpful.

@bradshawkylemake sure everything is up-to-date by using the "upgrade packages" button on the configuration tab of the Admin Console. It should switch automatically when you plug in a ethernet cable. However, it will likely get a new IP address from your router so make sure you account for that when trying to access the Admin Console or PG3x. @auger66I just released version 1.0.8, see if that version fixes your issue.

I get the following for my SolarEdge inverters using the node server: Which looks like it's telling me the amount of energy being produced by the solar array. It doesn't track accumulated power over various time periods if that's what you're looking for. But is that really useful for automation? The node server isn't trying to duplicate or replace a monitoring solution.

If you can switch the eisy to a wired network, do that and see if it works. The way the wireless networking is implemented on the eisy breaks a lot of device discovery methods.

@palaymanYes polyglot.universal-devices.com lists all current node servers and clicking on the node server brings up the details including price(s).

I screwed up the packaging. You'll have to re-install but it should work now. Go to the node server store, select refresh store. Then select the node server, click the install button and use the "Reinstall here?" button to re-install.

When you arm/disarm from the AC do you see any messages in the PG3 log? Commands from AC first route to PG3 and then PG3 routes to node server so if PG3 isn't seeing anything, that would imply that the AC isn't sending or isn't sending to the correct IP/port.

Not from the node server. The node server is just reporting what the server sends.

I started working on the node server and I reviewed the logs you posted above. What I think happened is that PG3 encountered a network error that it wasn't able to handle so it shutdown. When PG3 shutdown, it stopped (or attempted to stop) the node server. However, it looks like the node server didn't stop so that when PG3 restarted, it was unable to start the node server because it was already running. PG3. I've made a couple of changes to the node server to insure that it really does stop when PG3 tells it to. I should be able to release a new version tomorrow.

Yes, 3.1.17 will be the next PG3 version.

The PG3 bug is only effecting those messages displayed in the PG3 log. The check is wrong and then PG3 re-installs the node server config. Other than installing the config when it isn't needed, this doesn't effect anything else. It is fixed and will be available in the next release. Yes, you'll just need to do a upgrade packages to pick up the new release. It will probably be a few days from now. No, this fix won't effect ST-NuHeat. I'm planning to look into the node server this weekend. It needs to be updated to work on the eisy so I'll look into why it's stopping at the same time.

You're right. Fixed in version 2.0.8

The battery logic varies depending on the sensor. Some have 1 = OK, some have 0 = OK. When I wrote the node server I set up the battery definition based on whatever sensor I had available for testing. I'd need to go back and create another battery definition, then try to figure out which sensor needs to use which definition. I've resisted because I think Ambient's inconsistency in this area is bug. The CO2 battery field seems to be coming from the server data but without seeing the raw data from the server, I can't say anymore. Setting the log level to debug should output the raw data from the server in the log. CO2 battery comes from a field in the data called "batt_co2".

Use the "install dev packages" option in the admin console configuration tab and then try again. If you don't have an install dev packages option, you'll need to upgrade packages first.

Ahh, the node servers are running on PG3 but installed on the i994, correct? The verification check assumes that the node servers are supposed to be installed on the IoP running on the Polisy. It's a bug in PG3.

The 5 minute configuration update is either this PG3 instance fighting for control over those slots with something else or it isn't actually successful at updating the configuration. Every 5 minutes it queries the ISY/IoP for the node server configuration and verifies it against what it has in it's database. in this case, it's saying the user name value in the node server configuration is wrong, so it updates it to the correct username. The username field is set to the PG3 UUID/slot#. When I have 2 different versions of PG3 running, I've seen them do this, one changes, the other changes it back. That doesn't seem likely, but the way to check is to look at the configuration right after PG3 updates it. You may have to restart the admin console to get it to show the correct values. Look under Node Servers -> Configuration -> slot#. For NuHeat, it looks like a bug in the node server. It should only be shutting down if PG3 tells it to shutdown. Shutting down for any other reason is a bug. I'll take a look at it at some point. I just don't know when yet.

Once you migrate the licenses, it should be good.

No, unmanaged means it thinks something else is controlling the node servers in a specific slot. Migrating should have updated everything but it sounds like the IoX didn't get updated. You can do the migration again, it doesn't hurt to re-run it. The lack of license should prevent the node servers from running but they should be 'managed', not 'unmanaged'.

Ok, if I understand correctly, what you need to do is simply delete the PG2 node servers from the IoP, correct? My recommendation is to go through the 'unmanaged' node servers one by one and do the following: 1. From admin console Node Servers -> Configuration -> <slot> -> delete. This will delete the PG2 node server from the IoP. PG3 should then see that the slot is now free (may take a few minutes or log out of PG3 and log back in. 2. Install the PG3 node server into that slot. However, if you have scenes and programs configured for that node server, you may want to try and re-install the PG3 version instead. So skip step #1 and when installing the PG3 version, select the re-install option. It should install the PG3 version and if possible, it will attempt to keep the same nodes with the scenes and/or programs intact.

That implies that the username or password for the i994 as configured in PG2 is incorrect. (maybe it got reset somehow). Try re-entering them in PG2's ISY configuration and save. The reason you're getting the error and the node server's are being deleted is because PG2 can't communicate with the i994.

PG3x has more external system level dependencies than PG3. When doing an update, most of those dependencies are also shutdown and restarted. If any of the external dependencies don't restart, then PG3x won't start. We don't have a good way for users to check all the systems so for now, power cycling the eisy is probably the best way to reset everything.