From your endpoint:
hub-ip-address/device/hubMeshFullRefreshNow
How can I tell if that worked?
It doesn't seem to show up in any logs....
I tested it via postman and you get a 200 with a return of “ok”. But via rule no way to know.
Thanks.
1 Like
I just tried one of mine and it's 2 - 3 seconds for me.
1 Like
Sounds like improved Hub Mesh is the next thing for the HE hub.... 
I'm going to say this very tongue-in-cheek, but could you imagine if Hubitat released Matter Bridge capabilities on its hubs. Rather than Hub Mesh, you could use Matter (at least for devices that meet the specifications), to connect devices on C5-C8s.
As for the topic of this thread, I would guess there is some sort of software only thing that is coming to this new device; otherwise, I'm not sure if the upgraded internals are really that necessary.
That’s interesting. My devices hub (with not really many devices, maybe 30 across Zwave, Zigbee and Matter) constantly runs the lowest memory. I have 3 hubs, one with Local Devices, One with Cloud devices both feeding to the apps hub. The cloud has the highest most stable memory, but it really isn’t doing much at the moment, just my Ecobee. Rachio and power-wall are on it, but I never have sat down and configured anything with Rachio and power-wall. The Apps/automations hub is next then the local devices brings up the rear.
Shhh... Don't spoil the surprise!
(joking)
3 Likes
I see no benefits of substituting Hubitat Hub Mesh with Matter Bridge connection between HE hubs. The Matter standard is much more limited in capabilities and preference settings than the native HE device drivers.
4 Likes
That's why I started with tongue-in-cheek; in other words, I was joking. I definitely agree with you that it would be more limiting than the current Hub Mesh solution. Besides, my guess is that Hubitat staff would implement Matter Bridging for other reasons (simplify engineering time for Alexa, Google Home, Apple Home, other Matter controllers) rather than Hub Mesh.
3 Likes
Reading these messages, and returning to my original question about the speed of the UI it seems that moving activities with different radios/formats to different hubs can help. I am doing that anyway as I had settled on two Hubitats to handle upstairs and downstairs. And then I split zigbee and z-wave due to the previously mentioned zigbee issues on C8. I have not noticed much of a delay in the house. Sometimes we will walk into a room and it will take a couple of seconds for lights to come on, but generally responses are good.
But does splitting rules and apps across hubs improve speed of the UI? I run 95% of my rules off one hub and you can see from my video posted above that every rule takes a long time to open, save, etc. And I am constantly updating my rules to make them better so this is actually a little annoying. I have now gotten used to alt-tabbing to something else when opening a rule and coming back after a minute or so!
I sort of answered my question. I ran some tests on rule editing on the other hubs that have minimal or no rules installed. Compared to my main hub with all of the rules it is night and day. I don't know why I didn't think about this before.
So given that the UI appears to slow down based on the number of rules/apps you throw at it I guess the question is do I just put up with it. Or start moving things around hubs. The latter is a little irritating as I used to do this in the past and spent half my life playing find the rule.
