that’s great to hear, and yes I understand your words on the ‘something else in the system’. Of course I admit having a rather extensive system, running on a Pi4. Still, it does its work, very well I might add, and it has been sort of a sports to me to make it as efficient as possible, given its complexity.
Well, of course I didnt take everything out. Only the counting sensors and the unavailability sensor, which proved to have beaten the system, because now all is running. Slower than before, but it is running.
the entity_id option did, (and hopefully will any time soon in an incarnation you feel good about) offer the end-user the ultimate control he/she might need in certain cases. HAs been explained above, no need to repeat (I certainly don’t want to ‘gripe’ eh Mutt 
)
You see, it is rather easy for fellows here to tell me I have a complex system, and because of that should not complain because my processor hits 10%. I could counter that with the simplicity of several setups I see shared in the GitHub, which of course wouldn’t compare with more worked-through setups.
Point I think I am trying to make is if at all possible, consider both sides of the user community (and the lot in between).
The progress being made now is huge, many people will only feel the positive sides of it.
I certainly don’t want to take that away. But it has its downsides in efficiency.
I did love the control option that has been taken out now. If that could be brought back: wow. 1+1 would be 4!
Having a single or continuous evaluation in the template editor would be nice too. Single to check if a template is syntactically correct, and continuous to check it in operation.
btw, what is your assessment on the state_changed automations being ‘off’. Do they still create listeners (and should we comment them mout) or are they truly inactive in the system (and can we safely leave them, being ‘off’)
as another example I have this:
- alias: GitHub boolean updates sensor
id: GitHub boolean updates sensor
trigger:
platform: event
event_type: state_changed
condition:
condition: template
value_template: >
{{trigger.event.data.entity_id in
state_attr('group.github_repo_updates','entity_id')}}
can we already use the expand(‘group.github_repo_updates’) in a trigger_template (if yes, how, because it would have to evaluate to true?) so it sees to only those. I think that would be an improvement?
Ideally I would need to do something like:
- alias: GitHub boolean updates sensor
id: GitHub boolean updates sensor
trigger:
platform: state
entity_id: >
{{expand('group.github_repo_updates')|map(attribute='entity_id')|join(',\n')}}
thanks!
