Wait for event:

The HE seems to indicate when some Rules are "broken"... which I love.
I just did a bunch of device changes and "broke" some Rules by removing the Device, but the Rule did not indicate it was broken.
I had several "Wait for event" in my Rules where the Rule still contained a "wait for event" but the "event" was missing. They were empty because I had deleted the device. That is, the Rule no longer specified the "event" the event that the Rule was waiting for.
I would really like to see HE indicate that a Rule Is Broken when the Event that the Rule is waiting for is blank.

Did you click on the main RM parent app and try running the find broken rules check? I think that would find them.


1 Like

I have not.
But I rebroke the rule by removing the device it was waiting for.
It showed the rule was broken, within the Rule. But not when i selected Broken Rules.

To be clear, I was reviewing the Rule after problems related to my Long Range Device problems. When I first went into the Rule, it did NOT show the Rule was broken, the Rule just said "wait for event" and nothing else. There was nothing it was waiting for, so I input the Device. That fixed the problem. But my concern was why didn't HE indicate the Rule was broken? I would think that if there is a "wait for event" and no device was selected, that HE would indicate an error. HE did properly report that the device was missing when I intentionally broke the Rule, but it did not report, within the Rule that there was a problem until I added and then removed the Device that it was testing.

I hear ya, but I don't think the hub has any pre-emptive logic that checks for downstream effects when a device is removed. And there's no periodic "sweep" the hub does on all rules to ensure integrity along those lines. Features like that would be pretty great, but I'm guessing the processing overhead for such things is prohibitively steep.

If that rule was called, then I think it would probably flag as broken when it attempted to run, but prior to that, the rule doesn't even know yet that it's broken.

1 Like

I am thinking that having HE perform a more thorough check for Broken Rules might not be something you want to run on a frequent basis, but it would be great to be able run something like that on-demand when needed.

The Rule in question WAS called, and it did not indicate within the Rule that anything was wrong. It was only by examining the Rule myself, that I saw the problem.