Re: [mh] Important insteon update

[Gregg L. <gr...@li...>]

John R. wrote:

>> Insteon_PLM_xmit_delay=0.15
> 
> I set set this but only see this on startup:
> 
> 02/21/09 02:48:09 PM [Insteon_PLM] setting default xmit delay to: 0.25
> 02/21/09 02:48:09 PM [Insteon_PLM] setting x10 xmit delay to: 0.5
> 
> This is the default you mention.  Search of code indicates changing 
> these values will not generate output to the log.

Well don't I feel stupid.  I had set a lower limit equal to the default 
as a means to implement a form of "id10t proofing".  I just committed a 
mod that removes the limit.  Also, I just realized that while disabling 
throttling does remove the automatic throttling, it didn't cut the delay 
when encountering NACKs.  So, that's now also shaved from 1 sec to 0.3 
sec if throttling is disabled.  This may be a setting that will require 
a bit of tweaking as well (no ini entry as yet).  Sorry for the ask on 
testing something that I had not fully confirmed and am very glad you're 
paying attention to the logs.

> 02/21/09 02:50:46 PM [Insteon_PLM] Processing message for $equipment
> 02/21/09 02:50:46 PM [Insteon_Device] received status request report for 
> $equipment with on-level: 40%, hops left: 2
> 02/21/09 02:50:46 PM [Insteon_Device] WARN: making assumption that 
> $equipment is dimmable because devcat is not yet known
> 02/21/09 02:50:46 PM [Insteon_Device] WARN: making assumption that 
> $equipment is dimmable because devcat is not yet known
> 02/21/09 02:50:46 PM [Insteon_Device] WARN: making assumption that 
> $equipment is dimmable because devcat is not yet known

Those excess WARNs are a bit too much--hunh?  I'll try to find a way to 
make them less chatty.  Can you tell me what $equipment is?  I wonder if 
it is something that can be ping'd to get the devcat.

> 02/21/09 02:50:46 PM [Insteon_Device] WARN: queue timer on $laundry 
> expired. Attempting resend: status_request

I only counted one of these--which is pretty good given the number of 
devices that are being "PLM spammed".  But, you were still being limited 
to .25 sec inter-message delay vice the 0.15 delay.  So, can I ask you 
to svn update and try again?  I start seeing more NACKs as a result of 
the new lowered delay; but, no significant additional retries.

Gregg