I ordered 2 more hubs today because of your Hub Connect app 
. Did you just bite the bullet and recreate all your RM rules on each hub? Or can you load a backup on the new hubs and modify each rule? I have never done a restore before so I don’t even know if that would work.
1 Like
You are referring to @srwhite's HubConnect? I would LOVE to take credit for that awesomeness without having to do the maintenance!!!
1 Like
I haven't done a restore yet either.. You can move the rules over one at a time if you wanted too.. that's what I am doing. That way I can see if any issues or not and I don't have to install all the drivers at once.
lol, yea I meant to tag him in that post. I was planning on going all in as soon as the 2 hubs get here but slower may be a better approach. I was just not looking forward to recreating all my rules 
I was hoping I could modify them.
At the very least it would be nice if there were some way to clone the rules, then you could go in and modify them as needed.
Fundamentally, yes, I recreated them all.
It's not trivial, that's for sure but it's just one piece of the task.
- Remove device from current hub. (Exclude + remove)
- Join/Pair device to new hub. (include)
- Add new device to Automations
Personally, the Rule part was the easiest of the three 
You can sit in a chair, and there's no 'device dance' to contend with (twice)
As you know, each rule is a child app of Rule Machine. "Copying the Rule" would presumably have internal IDs for the devices.. you know, that number in Live Logs or in URLs of the device info page: /device/edit/396
I don't know how you'd untangle that potential mess. Duplicate numbers being just the first hurdle....
Yeah I hear you on that.. still hoping it happens sometime. Would make life a bit easier.
lol yea, that’s true. I’m not look forward to all of that 
. Lol
I started over from scratch. I was still having Zigbee issues when I begin my mutli-hub deployment. I'm glad I did. Things have been working very well.
It was figured out on WC so I'm sure it could be implemented, but it's not on there priority list I doubt.
I was surprised by RM changes in 2.0.7
Will he surprise us again?
Answer: yes, but of course WHAT and WHEN are completely unknown.. as he likes it. 
1 Like
I just got a second hub and search over the forum for the best multi-hub strategy. This seems like the agreed way forward and was planning on follow this route.
However, with the release of "Hub Mesh", would you still recommend this strategy?
Having one hub per floor with only locally connected devices and no apps or rules, and a hub controller hub with no radios and all apps and rules, would make maintenance easier, wouldn't it?
Would the above strategy recommendation change with Hub Mesh)
I think it's always better to have local rules/apps for each hub. That way if one goes offline it has less impact on the other.
The choice is also to split hubs by location or type.
I used to have 2 C-4's and a C-5 set by location - 1 C-4 downstairs, 1 Upstairs and C-5 for cloud/network apps. Only shared devices with C-5 for things like Lux / Alexa commands etc.
My current set up is C-7 for Z-Wave devices, C-5 for Zigbee devices and one of the C-4's for Network/Cloud apps. These are all in a closet on my main floor.
HubMesh is used sparingly but whereever needed to share devices to the C-4.
I have all hubs talking to a Node-RED server where I do all my rules/logic.
Note: I know this kind of defeats the everything local to the hub idea but for my use-case the trade off has been worth it.
So to summarize - if going by location then keeping rules/apps local to each hub is the way to go. Otherwise centralizing rules but splitting up by device type (Z-Wave/Zigbee/Cloud-net) works great too. Use HubMesh as necessary to communicate between hubs and/or use something like Node-RED and Maker API.
