Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

retention logic ignores alias(es) #31

Closed
klassisch opened this issue Sep 21, 2018 · 9 comments
Closed

retention logic ignores alias(es) #31

klassisch opened this issue Sep 21, 2018 · 9 comments
Labels

Comments

@klassisch
Copy link

The retention logic seems to ignore alias(es). Bug or feature?

@Apollon77 Apollon77 added the bug label Feb 24, 2019
@Apollon77
Copy link
Contributor

What exactly you mean? Are there more infos? Reproduction steps?

It may be that it was clear to me 1,5years back bt now not anymore :-( sorry

@klassisch
Copy link
Author

It is related to a discussion in the forum: https://forum.iobroker.net/post/176842 an the following, e.g. https://forum.iobroker.net/post/176985

And btw, maybe this https://forum.iobroker.net/post/178760 ff ist still open but no issue created

@Apollon77
Copy link
Contributor

ping

@klassisch
Copy link
Author

Thanks for the reminder.
Yes, I will retest in the ext days with my current system
Plattform: Windows
RAM: 7.3 GB
Node.js: v10.17.0
NPM: 6.11.3
JS-controller 3.1.4
History 1.9.6

@klassisch
Copy link
Author

Here is a test with the history adapter and alias.
In my opinion following findings:

  1. Entering an alias name but not activating logging will delete the alias name when storing
  2. Activiting a "mass subscription" using the blue wrench in the top right corner will delete alle alias names in the elected area

Here is a report in a text editor containing screenshots, logs and notes. I am not sure if this is allowed and good practice but let me try

iobroker-history-github-isssue-31-tests-by-klassisch-20200705.docx

@Apollon77
Copy link
Contributor

Ok if it is about that then it is kind of known and an admin topic where an issue exists!

1.) no data are stored when not activated. This is by design
2.) Admin issue exists.

So then we can close here?

@klassisch
Copy link
Author

For 2) it is great, that an Admin issue already exists
For 1) "by design" let me add one remark: If I temporarily want to pause the activation by removing the "activate" check, then I also lose the alias name. I guess that this is a consequence of this design decision . Has this also been intended?

@Apollon77
Copy link
Contributor

To 2,) if you temporary pause it currently you will loose ALL settings. Not just Alias ... because as soon as you disable it admin will remove it when it is stored. This is that way for all custom properties. Do also here ... admin topic you you want to propose to change this ;-)

@klassisch
Copy link
Author

ok, thanks for the explanation

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants