Z-Wave, Handshake and reliability

For Z-Wave related questions in Domoticz

Moderator: leecollings

Post Reply
Patricen
Posts: 108
Joined: Tuesday 06 February 2018 18:48
Target OS: Raspberry Pi / ODroid
Domoticz version: Beta rel
Contact:

Z-Wave, Handshake and reliability

Post by Patricen »

I know there is a handshake for z-wave protocol and I'm wondering if Domoticz uses it.
I do have several Popp radiator control valves and I mentioned that those that are connected through a repeater / extender are less reliable than those that are directly connected to the controller.
Is there a way checking the setpoint has really been applied to the device and if not resend the sertpoint?
Thx!
lost
Posts: 616
Joined: Thursday 10 November 2016 9:30
Target OS: Raspberry Pi / ODroid
Domoticz version:
Contact:

Re: Z-Wave, Handshake and reliability

Post by lost »

Patricen wrote: Saturday 06 April 2019 10:03 Is there a way checking the setpoint has really been applied to the device and if not resend the sertpoint?
Retry should be done automatically if the acknowledge is not received. Take care default retry time is several ten's of seconds (to avoid re-sending data on slow devices/z-wave networks).

See retry timeout there:
https://github.com/OpenZWave/open-zwave ... ig-Options

So, when you experience timeouts in log for the device as well as unchanged setpoint, a retry have already been done and was not effective...

If you have lots of scheduled items at the same time, you may also distribute schedules over a few minutes. This may avoid some low-z-wave bandwith saturation problems.
Patricen
Posts: 108
Joined: Tuesday 06 February 2018 18:48
Target OS: Raspberry Pi / ODroid
Domoticz version: Beta rel
Contact:

Re: Z-Wave, Handshake and reliability

Post by Patricen »

Thanks for this valuable input!
If I do understand well, there is only one retry that is performed if handshake is not received.
I'm going to try changing timeout.
I do have only one setpoint that fails updating regularly, it might be the setpoint device that is defective (popp trv).
Patricen
Posts: 108
Joined: Tuesday 06 February 2018 18:48
Target OS: Raspberry Pi / ODroid
Domoticz version: Beta rel
Contact:

Re: Z-Wave, Handshake and reliability

Post by Patricen »

This looks promissing, the "RetryTimeout" parameter was set as a comment by default in the Domoticz config file.
I removed the comment code and set the parameter to 40000 milliseconds
Up to now I programmed setpoint changes every 5 minutes (10 changes in total) without any failure.

Thanks!!
vinisz
Posts: 11
Joined: Monday 21 January 2019 20:05
Target OS: NAS (Synology & others)
Domoticz version:
Contact:

Re: Z-Wave, Handshake and reliability

Post by vinisz »

40000 is the default already, so, when not putting in this parameter, 40 seconds should already be in place. (see: https://github.com/OpenZWave/open-zwave ... ig-Options)

Do you think different about that ?
Patricen wrote: Wednesday 10 April 2019 20:10 This looks promissing, the "RetryTimeout" parameter was set as a comment by default in the Domoticz config file.
I removed the comment code and set the parameter to 40000 milliseconds
Up to now I programmed setpoint changes every 5 minutes (10 changes in total) without any failure.

Thanks!!
Patricen
Posts: 108
Joined: Tuesday 06 February 2018 18:48
Target OS: Raspberry Pi / ODroid
Domoticz version: Beta rel
Contact:

Re: Z-Wave, Handshake and reliability

Post by Patricen »

Hi,
It looked to me that the default value is 40secs provided the option is not set as a comment, but as you said it might be different.
I felt that removing the comment sign improved the situation but it can be a bad feeling...
vinisz
Posts: 11
Joined: Monday 21 January 2019 20:05
Target OS: NAS (Synology & others)
Domoticz version:
Contact:

Re: Z-Wave, Handshake and reliability

Post by vinisz »

Well, I would say a "default" means that that values applies if nothing else is set, but hey, I'm not 100% sure either....
I'll try to test with it as well, see what comes out...
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 0 guests