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)
As long as an entity had a unique ID, it can be renamed. It’s not an issue in most cases.
Read carefully. It doesn’t stay. It’s just the order that’s very important: if you delete the old ones you’ll delete its history too, so you need to e sure there’s overlap. Or do you mean the old entity might have a name that’s tied in a very descriptive way to the old integration or setup? Then yes, perhaps that’s not ideal, but personally I rename my entities to keep them functional when I first use them. For example, I won’t have an entity called sensor.shelly_pm_energy_1. That might be the name when it’s first created, but already then I’ll rename it to sensor.outbuilding_energy which is descriptive of its function and then it doesn’t matter if it comes from an old or new integration.
1 Like
is a custom component.
You should report issues within the repository of this integration
If you’re just looking for an argument, perhaps take this somewhere else, or get your hands dirty and contribute to the project. Either way, you’re trivialising this. Simple, fast, risky and efficient isn’t all the same.
In really big databases that must be online 24/7 it is not that simple. Actions like these will lock up a system with table/page/row locks (for one). If downtime cannot be scheduled, then you’d use tricks such as operating on a copy of a table (underneath a view), or drop your indexes to make the alter faster before re-adding the indexes (and/or the FK like they’ve done here). Even for an offline migration that can be too much. In the case of HA, people don’t run their systems on commercial hardware, even though a 10-100GB DB doesn’t seem that big.
Partitioning would’ve made no difference: When doing an alter, your DB needs to be fully consistent before you resume operation. It’s not like you can change one partition by itself. You can fake things under a view, but that adds a lot of complexity.
I think part of the challenge is that ideally you’d want to redesign the whole DB from the ground up, but that will make migrations very hard (changing a flying plane and all that). HA also supports many engines, which means you need to account for the quirks of each, and that you cannot fully utilise the specific strengths of certain engines.
7 Likes
hm… this could already be done.
You can add your individual water meters to the water usage dashboard, and they will be shown individually…
(Just similar, as you could also add your individual devices to the main electrical energy usage graph)
This should work just similar as in this screenshot
Looking like a nice release
I saw that the Energy dashboard now supports adding a “total” device that monitors the home power consumption as a total and it is then compared to the rest of the devices.
Does anybody know how/where to define that device?
In my case I have a Shelly 3EM monitoring total. I have been abusing the dashboard and set the Shelly 3EM to grid consumption and the individual devices as return to grid. That also gives me the delta. But the update should make that obsolete
So I would guess that somehow I need to tell HA to use the three Shelly 3 EM entities as total?
And does anybody know it the ista ecotrend integrations need some kind of manual input to pull the old data?
I do not see my old data after the update. One of my favorite updates of this release 
.
yes, this is - unfortune.
the best Idea I would have about this is - not to ‘replace’ the entity in the Dashboard Settings.
It really depends on the setup - if you get your measurements from the Meter via an IR reader, you could probably just replace the meter, and the IR reader will still continue to work - and continue counting.
If you are using something like a shelly, and this needs to be replaced, I would expect that the integration would probably create a new, additional device with its entities.
In this case, I would just add the new entity to the dashoard and also keeping the old one for the history.
If you need to replace a meter, which comes from your solar installation, it might be a bit more complex, ad it would depend on the integration if it will just use the existing entity with some ‘new’ values - or if it would create new entities…
With the help from @bdraco I managed to find key and the key slot from my old backup, and set it manually with new integration in my current installation:
I did a complete reset (factory reset) and set everything up again with a new account. The key is therefore out of date - I tested it from a backup.
Hi dev,
thanks again for your hard work!
I noticed that with 2024.9 release i was unable to start and stop motion detection on my camera (unifi video integration). i’ve test trough developer option calling the relate action!
Maybe this issue ?
In my case is unifi video integration, not unifi protect.
And the issue start from 2024.9, revert back to last 2024.8 release fix the problem
1 Like
Agree. But it’s not applicable every time.
I had sensors, lets say: house_1 and house_2 (because of 2 sections of the building). Both used to be assigned to the dashboard for total consumption.
Now I have wattsonic_meter.
I really don’t want to
- loose old sensors, because are still useful
- rename wattsonic_meter sensor to anything else, because the name indicates where it belongs (Regardless it’s impossible to cover 2 previous sensors with the new single one)
As long as an entity had a unique ID, it can be renamed. It’s not an issue in most cases.
Not sure about that. If an entity is created by an integration, the integration will reference it by its original name. It doesn’t know that HA changed the id. Obviously, it would fail in such a case.
IMO unique id is used mainly by FEs, to map original names with their user-friendly alternatives. But may be wrong of course.
Still, I see no big issue with creating “meta sensors” that would collect data from sensors assigned to Energy dashboard, making the dashboard independent from those source sensors. But it would have required coming up with this usecase (pretty obvious IMO) in advance, before the implementation of the Energy Dashboard.
Exact same issue here on NSPanel Pro… sections view doesn’t display anymore and browser gets stuck…
Peter is correct. Unique_id actually just ties entities to a config entry that holds parameters and settings for the entity that are managed by the UI. Things like unit’s, show as, name, entity_id, etc. All of which can be modified while still maintaining it’s original link to a configuration. It’s not just for friendly name.