Let's talk about a set up that "self fixes"

What kind of things are people doing in regards to getting things to correct themselves without intervention?

Usual stuff...

  • Late Night routine to make sure all lights off/locks set properly.
  • Watchdog that reboots hub if activity/mem issues.
  • Hub and network on a UPS.
  • Certain rules (sequences in NR) to verify lights turned on/off when commanded to (thanks @JasonJoel for that idea!)
  • Also some have a separate Wifi outlet (or similar) on their hub as a last resort reboot kind of thing.
  • Multiple hubs for increased reliability, reduced overhead. Not exactly self fixing but resistant to complete failure.

I have 8 hubs hubmeshed together. I have written rules that listen for CPUHighLoad? And keep track of how many, how often and wait to reboot, or just reboot, depending on the situation. There was another thread here that has part of those rules at the very formative stage.

1 Like

That is an amazing amount of hubs!! :bowing_man:

1 Like

Hubitat runs everything.

I was thinking about how sometimes things get hung up and need a refresh/initialize. I suppose things like watchdog would be useful for that.

I am lucky in that, unless I let a battery go flat, nothing acts up.
I have been lucky in device choices.

The other thing you can do, again not necessarily self-healing but having some redundant sensors can help with things too.. for example I mounted a contact sensor on my bulldog water valve and it confirms that the lever actually rotated when I set it on or off..

I have been using these apps to notify me if my sensors stop reporting in (typically, because their batteries are dead):

Very useful!


As much as I have tried, I cannot get my wife to self-correct. :man_shrugging:


Why? I have 258 devices running on a single hub. What situation requires 8 hubs???


Is that 258 "real" devices, or a lot of "virtual" ones?

I guess it depends on what you mean by "virtual" devices vs. "real"? If you mean virtual as in "a group", I have none. If virtual, for example means TCP/IP devices that use "virtual" driver then yeah many are virtual. I have Denon AVR receivers, Denon HEOS speakers, Ecobee thermostats, an AlarmDecoder based alarm system, a WeatherFlow Tempest, an Ecowitt hub, 2 BOND Hubs, a Rheem Water Heater, etc. Honestly those virtual devices are more intensive on hub since many require frequent polling. So I feel like I tax my hub pretty hard, yet still can't see the reason to have 8 hubs. I haven't yet seen a reason to have 2!

For physical devices:

  • 12 Zigbee devices
  • 102 Z-Wave Plus devices
1 Like

All RM, one does outdoor lighting, another does indoor lighting etc.
Many sensors, all but one Hub C4's.
Load "spreading"

Hmm ok. Guess my point is, even with 250+ devices, I have yet to have a reason to spread the load. My entire home is automated. Every single light, every switch, 50% of the outlets, cameras, motion sensors, door sensors, window sensors, environmental controls, etc. One hub seems to manage it all just fine. To each his own I guess :man_shrugging:


How many?

Spread out over several acres, multiple out buildings.
Farthest out devices are 200' from central location.
Very strong mesh(s). Many repeating devices.
Many, many intertwining rules.

1 Like

I have 4 Production hubs and a 5th as development. (two C5 and three C7) and the single reason for "Why?" is "load sharing by area". I want to stay below 65 Z-Devices per Hub. I want all my Internet Facing / Polling devices on a hub.

I'm not finding any difficulty in imagining 8 hubs over the physical area described. :slight_smile:

1 Like

My philosophy has been the idea of multiple meshes = interference. So I want to avoid that whenever possible.

I think this is the best way to describe what I am doing.

Download the Hubitat app