Change request for ...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Change request for Range check

4 Posts
2 Users
0 Likes
10.2 K Views
(@jean-luc)
Active Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 6
Topic starter  

Hi,

When there is an "out of range" for a certain field, iotguru robot sends a message. When it is back to the normal range we receive another message from the robot.

This is fine and very useful. Actually the robot provides the node name and fiel name which triggers the alert.

There is only a thing which might be helpful, it is to provide also the device name. If we have several devices with the same node name, we have to search which one has triggered the alert.

Example of message received:

============================

Hi,

The measurement value of DHT22 - temperature is in the NORMAL RANGE. It was out of range for 1 hour 22 minutes.

The range is between 15 and 27, the last value was 15.8.

Best regards,

IoT GURU Alert Robot

=============================

As an example a message including the device could be:

The measurement value of Bedroom - DHT22 - temperature is in the NORMAL RANGE. It was out of range for 1 hour 22 minutes.

There is another way: we can include the device name inside the node name, but it seems to me less clean.


   
Quote
(@gabor-auth)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 15
 

There is only a thing which might be helpful, it is to provide also the device name. If we have several devices with the same node name, we have to search which one has triggered the alert.

There are "historical" reasons for this, at the beginning there was no device, only node and field, later appeared devices and they still missing in some places.

I've just raised a ticket about this, thank you! 🙂

This post was modified 3 years ago by admin

   
ReplyQuote
(@jean-luc)
Active Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 6
Topic starter  

Thank you!

Maybe this topic can be closed.


   
ReplyQuote
(@jean-luc)
Active Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 6
Topic starter  

Any idea when it will be implemented?


   
ReplyQuote
Share: