| Author |
|
Viper
Groupie
Joined: January 14 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: March 14 2010 at 15:26 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Requirement: I would like to be able to define the order of trigger execution when I have multiple triggers for a single trigger event.
Priority: Low
Current work around: I know it is possible to do this by manipulating the trigger ID for each trigger so the alphabetic order of the trigger ID defines the order of execution, but this causes me to create trigger IDs that are less meaningful and hard to find when looking for a trigger.
Possible solution: A "Priority" value for each trigger that defines the order of execution when multiple triggers exists for a trigger event. Internally, this could be prepended to the Trigger ID to create the key for determining the order.
Other things to consider: The order of execution when a single "device event" causes multiple "trigger events" (group in and device change).
Just some thoughts as I get more triggers with IDs like "A-xxxx" and "Z-xxxx".
Tom
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
BeachBum
Super User
Joined: April 11 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1880
|
| Posted: March 14 2010 at 15:55 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Why not have multiple macros within a trigger? That way you can order the execution. Or am I missing something here…
__________________
Pete - X10 Oldie
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Viper
Groupie
Joined: January 14 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: March 14 2010 at 16:28 | IP Logged
|
|
|
I'm using multiple motion sensors, dark/light sensors, and control buttons to enable and disable triggers. I have found the performance of this to be better than changing global variables and checking them in macros.
It also allows me to have multiple scenarios going each with their own set of triggers and macros without putting all those things into a single macro.
Lastly, I'm doing more and more single statement triggers that never even load a macro for even better performance.
So, since I was essentially forced to enable/disable triggers due to the battery operated devices blasting in two evenets, I have taken advantage of interrupt or event driven programming to actually simplify a lot of nasty macros I used to have and get better response times.
I hope that all made sense....
Tom
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
BeachBum
Super User
Joined: April 11 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1880
|
| Posted: March 14 2010 at 16:39 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Tom, you’re right on. I have the same scenario and am also executing in the Boolean instead of macros.
__________________
Pete - X10 Oldie
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Viper
Groupie
Joined: January 14 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: March 14 2010 at 17:17 | IP Logged
|
|
|
I do a lot of "internal" processing in the boolean field, but anything that sends a command to a device, I put in the action field so PH can queue it properly. I've also learned to create PLM Groups (even for single devices) instead direct device commands because the battery operated devices don't seem to play nice and I need PH to occasionally send the Group Cleanups when collisions occur. Of course, this is because I'm now getting such fast response on the triggers that PH is sending out the commands before or at the same time as the second event from the triggering device.
I'm loving it!
Tom
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
PowerHome Messageboard : PowerHome Feature Requests
Topic: Trigger Execution Order
