Look for the hidden entities might be there
I did the upgrade yesterday, I think that should be plenty of time for that to appear…
The first thing I looked for myself after upgrading was the untracked consumption, and I remember it not being there. I then watched the release livestream, and during watching that and refreshing the energy dashboard page it suddenly was there - I didn’t enable anything. I suppose you tried clearing browser cache etc?
Nice! The ability to just control those gaps natively (similar to PowerToys Fancyzones) would be awesome.
2 Likes
No; didn’t find it
The only reason I can think of it would not be there is if you do not have any grid or solar sensors.
HA needs to be able to calculate the whole house load before it can derive the untracked consumption from that.
Do you have grid sources, or some other power source?
Otherwise it’s maybe just a cache clearing issue. There’s no setting to enable or disable this.
Hi @NathanCu, thanks for your answer, but I’m not sure how to do that.
I had this automation that was working fine with the normal intents:
alias: Alarm
description: This automation activates the phone alarm in 'time_amount' minutes.
trigger:
- platform: conversation
command:
- Set the alarm in {time_amount} minuts
condition: []
action:
- data:
message: command_activity
data:
intent_action: android.intent.action.SET_ALARM
intent_extras: >-
{% set alarm_time = now() +
timedelta(minutes=trigger.slots.time_amount|int) %} {{
'android.intent.extra.alarm.HOUR:' ~ alarm_time.hour|string ~
',android.intent.extra.alarm.MINUTES:' ~ alarm_time.minute|string ~
',android.intent.extra.alarm.SKIP_UI:true' }}
action: notify.mobile_app_xxx
- set_conversation_response: The alarm will ring in {{trigger.slots.time_amount}} minutes.
mode: single
So I tried this in my configuration file:
intent_script:
PhoneAlarm:
description: Set the alarm in the phone (in minutes)
speech:
text: Alarm set in {{ trigger.slots.time_amount }} minutes
action:
action: notify.mobile_app_xxx
data:
message: command_activity
data:
intent_action: android.intent.action.SET_ALARM
intent_extras: >-
{% set alarm_time = now() + timedelta(minutes=trigger.slots.time_amount|int) %} {{
'android.intent.extra.alarm.HOUR:' ~ alarm_time.hour|string ~
',android.intent.extra.alarm.MINUTES:' ~ alarm_time.minute|string ~
',android.intent.extra.alarm.SKIP_UI:true' }}
Following the documentation from: Intent Script - Home Assistant
But I can’t see how the LLM is supposed to pass the variable ‘time_amount’ to the intent_script.
It seems that Yale Access Bluetooth can’t fetch offline keys from new Yale (Home) integration, as it used to with August integration. Any suggestions?
1 Like
I’ve been trying since last night after switching from August to Yale, the Bluetooth connection is broken! I even created a new account, performed factory settings on my Yale Linus, re-integrated everything + Connector WLAN… Nothing has helped. A restart of Home Assistant, instance of Yale Access Bluetooth and Yale deleted and Yale re-added successfully… Now I have a found Yale Access Bluetooth and am asked for offline key and slot… What else to try? Also checked all logs and protocols, no success. - I also tried the old key and slot - searched everything and found nothing for the key and slot… Does anyone have a tip?
Integration with Yale Access Bluetooth
- The Yale integration must support the lock. - yes Linus Lock V1
- The Yale Access Bluetooth integration must support the lock. - Yes Linus Lock V1
- The Bluetooth integration must be active and functional. - Yes, everything went perfectly under August.
- The lock must be discoverable by the Yale Access Bluetooth integration. - Yes, Screenshot
- The account logged in with the Yale integration must have the offline keys. - yes, only one account all new…
This clearly states that the offline key will be executed. All points are taken into account. + Yale lock reset, everything deleted from account and account deleted! Re-created and re-linked everything.
Nice update to the sections!
It needs one more thing and then I can convert all my dashboards 
Is changing the sections layouts’ grid size on the roadmap… now they are all fixed so making 3 equal icons on a row still needs an hstack card extra…
In my experience, the DB migration requires at least as much free disk space as the size of your current DB. After the migration, the DB is about 25% bigger.
1 Like
Seems that a similar estimation is for a “repack of a native sqlite base” case.
1 Like
Worth to mention that if it’s true, then it’s not db limitation but HA architecture.
I understand 10days limit for sqlite running on raspberypi class HW. But with resonable resources said postgress can maintain and serve in real-time data out of unlimited stored size. If db and app are properly designed.
on the other side of the coin, indeed time series databases are even more efficient for such a job. I recently installed Postgres with TimescaleDB, LLTS and Grafana. All running on rpi4 together with HA. and indeed, graphs provided by grafana are rendered way faster than Apex charts.
Another benefit is, that such postgres-based db cannot break (benefit of fully transactional db) In worst scenario some records might be lost but anomalies in stored data will definitively not affect HA (which cannot be said about sqlite sometimes messed up by HA)
2 Likes
btw the Energy dashboard. I can see some love put on this recently.
What hit me not long ago is, that the dashboard is tightly coupled with sensors set to it (with their entity names)
If one collects energy data for years and then installs FVE, he likely has to change the dashboard settings replacing energy sensors with others, likely provided by a solar inverter (consumption and production)
In such case house consumption for past days/years is gone from the dashboard.
The same will happen if you change the energy sensor for another one, unless you secure the same entity name
Do you know about incoming improvement in this area?
I don’t, but there’s this to help, even though it’s quite manual: HA Energy Dashboard FAQ · GitHub. See #1.
That actually is a big issue now that HA assumes what those values mean.
Let’s take my installation. I have:
- Smart meter reporting as one sum over all phases
- A sensor for each of the 3 phases for the whole house (reporting 2 values, inbound and outbound)
- A sensor for each of the 3 phases per subpanel
- Multiple sensors for individual circuits in the subpanels
- Individual devices reporting their own consumption
Assuming the lower 4 can be summed up and compared to the first one is nonsense.
(It’s already annoying that the smart meter sums don’t match any combination of the per-phase measurements of my own sensors.)
Thank you for pointing me out to that. Didn’t know about it at the time I changed the dashboard. And this is the worst thing: most of us probably notice that days after changing the dashboard.
From the linked article, it seems like it’s possible with a little bit of trickery. But if “old” sensor has to stay in the system (my case) it’s a kind of embarrassing proposal.
BTW I’m not sure it’s even possible to rename sensors provided by an inverter integration.
??? really why? I’m admin of multiple Postgres databases, size really is not an issue. And if (possibly) is table partitioning is our friend. For example OpenStreetMap is running on Postgres and whole planet is really big. Compared to OSM, 900 days history is probably very small DB.
I don’t understand the strange approach for updating schemas. Convert integer column to bigint is really simple, for example alter table ha.states alter column state_id type bigint and we’re done.
I remember some HA DB migration in the past. Whole schema had about 700 MB size. The migration took hours on SSD and generated 35 GB (GIGABYTES!) of transaction logs. for migration 700 MB database. It’s about 50 times bigger size of logs than was the whole database size. I saw queries as “update … set old_state = state limit 999”, “delete … limit 999” etc.
How can happen “Not all migrations were successful despite being marked as successful.” ? Doing the migration in transaction can prevent this (all or nothing).
If I understood recorder/migration.py, upgrade to 2024.9 will migrate DB schema to version 46 - it will drop foreign constraints, will change bigint to bigint and schema version 47 will re-create constraints dropped in schema version 46, right? In this case we should insert rows into table ha.schema_changes to avoid this unnecessary migration
I love HA, but DB migration should be really improved a lot. Why this strange approach? Is some SQLALCHEMY limitation?
2 Likes
There are very clever people working on HA. However the database seems to me too have always been a weak point. Perhaps they need more database people. Yes, that is a hint!
6 Likes
This should probably come in the future…
First, this graph should also have the ability to hide specific devices (would be perfect, if it would just inherit the settings from the ‘track single devices’ graph above)