Zwave node numbering

[peet3kabo]

Since I'm still trying to implement and test all kind of stuff on Domoticz I'm still changing a lot of stuff.
Now when I'm changing something with zwave devices I have to exclude and include excisting devices.
Now comes the question, when I exclude a device and then include it again, Domoticz or the zwave stick gives it a new node number.
This is everytime the next available.
Now I can't find the node numbers that I excluded anywhere.
The only thin I see is the included node's.
Why doesn't the controller give it the next available number, for example node 3 if that was excluded?
Or is there still a register in the controller that keeps the previous used numbers occupied?
Can't find it anywhere so someone who can enlighten me?

[Egregius]

He just takes the highest used number + 1. A lot of systems work that way, it’s just easier, faster and safer than to check wich of the id’s has become available.

[kimhav]

Made the same reflection as you when removing a z-wave device that the specific node number becomes empty and new zwave device is just using the next highest node number available. Guess that is how OpenZwave have been designed which Domoticz utilize. It would be nice to be able to change the node numbering but it's not a must. So think this one should be asked in the OZW forum.

[Egregius]

And what's the problem with skipping numbers? You should never need them. I just hope the free numbers will be used once I hit the 255 limit.

[kimhav]

And what's the problem with skipping numbers? You should never need them. I just hope the free numbers will be used once I hit the 255 limit.

I can only speak from my perspective and it would be that the numbering helps me to keep devices close in the list from "grouping" perspective. So it's more cosmetic when you have a high number of devices.

[peet3kabo]

He just takes the highest used number + 1. A lot of systems work that way, it’s just easier, faster and safer than to check wich of the id’s has become available.

Ok that is clear and obvious then

[peet3kabo]

And what's the problem with skipping numbers? You should never need them. I just hope the free numbers will be used once I hit the 255 limit.

That would eventually be the question yes

[Egregius]

And what's the problem with skipping numbers? You should never need them. I just hope the free numbers will be used once I hit the 255 limit.

I can only speak from my perspective and it would be that the numbering helps me to keep devices close in the list from "grouping" perspective. So it's more cosmetic when you have a high number of devices.

Why do you use grouping if you have domoticz? Mine is running for 3 years now without any group.

[peet3kabo]

And what's the problem with skipping numbers? You should never need them. I just hope the free numbers will be used once I hit the 255 limit.

I can only speak from my perspective and it would be that the numbering helps me to keep devices close in the list from "grouping" perspective. So it's more cosmetic when you have a high number of devices.

Why do you use grouping if you have domoticz? Mine is running for 3 years now without any group.

I for example now have 3 zipato rgbw 2 bulbs above my diningroom table.
This is for now and will change when I rebuild a lot of stuff in my house.
I now created a group for these 3 to switch them on all at once i the same setting (colour and percentage), both automated or manual.
So I think that is a good example for grouping on Domoticz or you must have another suggestion or solution

[Egregius]

I would just send 3 commands. Or have them follow each other. If A is 20% and B isn't,set B to 20% eyc.

[peet3kabo]

I would just send 3 commands. Or have them follow each other. If A is 20% and B isn't,set B to 20% eyc.

That could also be a solution.
Now I have only 1 switch for the 3 lights.
This way I can also switch between settings with different scènes.
I'm not familiar with any programmingso this works for me, plain and simple

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-G935F met Tapatalk