Disabling one modbus-read node will move other nodes to "closed" state #487
Comments
|
This issue is stale because it has been open 60 days with no activity. It will be closed in 30 days, but can be saved by removing the stale label or commenting. |
|
I took a look at the issue and i think i know what the issue is! The Test Server client in the example is setup in both Nodes now one might think that these are separate clients but they are not! If you disable one of the nodes the client goes into it's closed state and that will affect the other node as well, i consider this a bug and we should change that behavior! As a Workaround for now you could however create a new client for one of the nodes (the '+' symbol in the node settings) and set it to the same IP Address/Port this will decouple the clients! |
|
Good news! I identified the bug and fixed it, but i still need to test things to see if everything else still works i expect a release in the next two weeks if that timetable changes i let you know. Also thank you for the example flow and the very thorough explanation of the issue :) Have a great weekend. |
|
Hi, My apologies for the short notice but i hoped that i can still find a fix today but that didn't worked out. |
|
Hey, Take your time! It really is something that only has affected me during development of flows, and most of my flows are quite stable at this point, so I don't see this come up very often. Thanks for working on this! |
|
option "d" for disable see "d": true => Disabled |
Which node-red-contrib-modbus version are you using?
5.41.0
What happened?
I have a couple
modbus-readnodes that refer to the same server. Usually this works quite alright.However, when modifying flows I tend to enable and disable nodes or groups of nodes sometimes. When I disable a
modbus-readnode, I notice that all the other nodes that associate themselves with the samemodbus-serverwill move to a "closed" state and will stop reading from the server indefinitely (until node-red is restarted.)Server
Modbus-Server Node
How can this be reproduced?
Example flow
[ { "id": "0e37c0f212591d47", "type": "modbus-read", "z": "d46d2bc29f86c250", "name": "Always running", "topic": "", "showStatusActivities": false, "logIOActivities": false, "showErrors": false, "showWarnings": true, "unitid": "", "dataType": "HoldingRegister", "adr": "0", "quantity": "1", "rate": "1", "rateUnit": "s", "delayOnStart": false, "startDelayTime": "", "server": "94d99994b72809c9", "useIOFile": false, "ioFile": "", "useIOForPayload": false, "emptyMsgOnFail": false, "x": 490, "y": 380, "wires": [ [ "a89e59cbbad53d59" ], [] ] }, { "id": "a75206a1b33c393c", "type": "modbus-read", "z": "d46d2bc29f86c250", "name": "Right-click > Node > Disable me!", "topic": "", "showStatusActivities": false, "logIOActivities": false, "showErrors": false, "showWarnings": true, "unitid": "", "dataType": "HoldingRegister", "adr": "1", "quantity": "1", "rate": "1", "rateUnit": "s", "delayOnStart": false, "startDelayTime": "", "server": "94d99994b72809c9", "useIOFile": false, "ioFile": "", "useIOForPayload": false, "emptyMsgOnFail": false, "x": 520, "y": 500, "wires": [ [ "5dfd9114971bee9f" ], [] ] }, { "id": "24bff9ce523ba95d", "type": "comment", "z": "d46d2bc29f86c250", "name": "Right-click and disable the node below.", "info": "", "x": 540, "y": 440, "wires": [] }, { "id": "a89e59cbbad53d59", "type": "debug", "z": "d46d2bc29f86c250", "name": "debug 37", "active": true, "tosidebar": false, "console": false, "tostatus": true, "complete": "payload", "targetType": "msg", "statusVal": "payload", "statusType": "auto", "x": 680, "y": 380, "wires": [] }, { "id": "5dfd9114971bee9f", "type": "debug", "z": "d46d2bc29f86c250", "name": "debug 38", "active": true, "tosidebar": false, "console": false, "tostatus": true, "complete": "payload", "targetType": "msg", "statusVal": "payload", "statusType": "auto", "x": 760, "y": 500, "wires": [] }, { "id": "84a2aed2a22b5929", "type": "modbus-server", "z": "d46d2bc29f86c250", "name": "", "logEnabled": false, "hostname": "127.0.0.1", "serverPort": 10502, "responseDelay": 100, "delayUnit": "ms", "coilsBufferSize": 10000, "holdingBufferSize": 10000, "inputBufferSize": 10000, "discreteBufferSize": 10000, "showErrors": false, "showStatusActivities": false, "x": 480, "y": 240, "wires": [ [], [], [], [], [] ] }, { "id": "66bc7cb59eb28303", "type": "comment", "z": "d46d2bc29f86c250", "name": "\"Deploy modified nodes\"", "info": "", "x": 500, "y": 560, "wires": [] }, { "id": "8e4ef4f6177cbd29", "type": "comment", "z": "d46d2bc29f86c250", "name": "Deploy this example", "info": "", "x": 490, "y": 320, "wires": [] }, { "id": "94d99994b72809c9", "type": "modbus-client", "name": "Test Server", "clienttype": "tcp", "bufferCommands": true, "stateLogEnabled": false, "queueLogEnabled": false, "failureLogEnabled": true, "tcpHost": "127.0.0.1", "tcpPort": "10502", "tcpType": "DEFAULT", "serialPort": "/dev/ttyUSB", "serialType": "RTU-BUFFERD", "serialBaudrate": "9600", "serialDatabits": "8", "serialStopbits": "1", "serialParity": "none", "serialConnectionDelay": "100", "serialAsciiResponseStartDelimiter": "0x3A", "unit_id": "1", "commandDelay": "1", "clientTimeout": "1000", "reconnectOnTimeout": true, "reconnectTimeout": "2000", "parallelUnitIdsAllowed": true, "showErrors": false, "showWarnings": true, "showLogs": true } ]modbus-readnodes (see the in-flow comments!)What did you expect to happen?
I would expect the remaining
modbus-readnodes to continue operating andmodbus-serverto remain connected as long as there's at least onemodbus-readnode associated with themodbus-serveris enabled.Other Information
This is also reproducible with 5.30.0.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: