Currently, there is an option in the Motion Lighting app to "disable when lights are turned off manually", and then there is a sub-option to specify "until next mode change" (my quoted option names might be a little off because I'm not at home and can't check). I would like to add an additional sub-option to specify "until all motion sensors are inactive".
The use case is... If I have two occupancy sensors in a room, but only one is reading active, and I then turn off the lights, I would like the lights to stay off until both occupancy sensors read inactive instead of the lights turning back on when the second occupancy sensor picks me up. I believe this replicates the default behavior of a group of Lutron occupancy sensors, which is what I'm using. I could create a virtual motion sensor and a rule machine rule to only set it to inactive when all motion sensors in the room become inactive, and then use the virtual sensor in the Motion Lighting app, but I believe this additional layer of Rule Machine logic and virtual sensor would add some unwanted latency to the Motion Lighting app triggering.
Doesn't "additional sensors to keep on" already do what you want? (Wait, I guess not if you want it to turn it on in the first place. I guess I'm used to just picking my best sensor for that. Zone Motion Controller might be able to help...)
This is very easy to do in Rule Machine. Motion Lighting is for the simple use-cases to get people up and running. It's not meant to be the end-all-be-all of options that are available for doing motion lighting. Have you used Rule Machine yet? I would recommend taking a look. You can definitely get the functionality you want.
Yes, I know it can be done with Rule Machine, but I find Rule Machine too slow to be used for time critical motion activated lighting. The difference is, the Motion lighting app keeps track of state, so when it needs to do something, it can just do it (almost) instantly without having to evaluate a bunch of conditions first, which really slows things down. Rule Machine is not a replacement for Motion Lighting... unless you like your lights to come on when you’re half way through the room.
My Motion Lighting apps take around 300 ms to respond and even that is bordering on too slow because you still have to include the time it takes for the motion sensor to detect motion (I think ~400-500 ms in my case), plus the time it takes for the wireless signal to get to the Hubitat (I think around 100 ms in my case), plus the time it takes for wireless signal to get to the light switch (~100 ms). So add all of those together and you are looking at 0.9-1.0 seconds between entering a room and the lights coming on. If a Rule Machine app takes 750 ms to respond, you bump the total time up to 1.5 seconds, and that extra half second over the Motion Lighting app is definitely noticeable to me.
The thing I think you're forgetting is that the reason that Motion Lighting is 100ms faster is because is it SIMPLE. If you start adding more complexity to it, it is going to take more time for the app to process the data. And if you can tell the difference between 300ms and 400ms you're a better man than I.
When I said the Motion Lighting app takes 300 ms, I was counting from the time the Lutron Integration I’m using first logs motion active until the time it logs lights on received from the Lutron bridge. If we’re just talking from the time the Motion Lighting app logs Motion active to the time it says “setting dimmers” as in your screenshot, then my Motion Lighting apps take about 40 ms, which is about 10 times faster, or about 350 ms faster, than your Rule Machine app there, and yes, I can notice that.
I do agree with you about keeping Motion Lighting lean though, and I wouldn’t want the feature added if it was going to slow things down, which it might depending on how it was implemented.
Okay. So, I'm not sure I'm understanding your problem with using Rule Machine over Motion Lighting. If your Rule Machine rule were as simple as Motion Lighting it would be as fast (all 300ms) but if you add a whole lot to it, like mine is
then it will be slower. Just like if you add a lot to Motion Lighting. So, if you keep your rule simple in Rule Machine, why do you think it would be significantly slower than Motion Lighting?
Sigh, no. My Motion Lighting app is quite complicated and still it only takes 40 ms. Recreating it in Rule Machine would be a huge rule, bigger than yours, and it would be way too slow due to having to evaluate all of the conditions at the time of motion detected instead of being stateful and having everything already evaluated. Anyways, we’re going off in the weeds now since bertabcd1234 has provided me a solution of using the Zone Motion Controller app, which I will try.
