Thank you both for your input.  I agree, I do not like the scheduled power cycle option either and I continue to look for the root cause of the issue.

The reason I considered a scheduled power cycle is that it seems that after a power cycle I do not see any errors, then over a few days or weeks I start to see errors, 85 reads, device not found, etc and then I get a lockup, although the timing is very variable.

I do have heartbeat file which is monitored by another machine, so I will look at using that to power cycle it.

One other thought, I have separate power supplies for 1-wire and the Pi.  Can I just power cycle the 1-wire adapter and leave the Pi running?


On 13/07/2019 19:58, Stefano Miccoli via Owfs-developers wrote:


On 11 Jul 2019, at 23:10, Mick Sulley <m...@sulley.info <mailto:m...@sulley.info>> wrote:

The reason for the question is that I still have random bus lockups and I am considering creating something to power cycle the system, either on a time basis, e.g. 3am each day, or based on some early warning detection from the data in interface/statistics if that is possible.

Does anyone have an opinion on scheduled power cycle?  Good idea or not?

This make sense only if you are sure that the bus lockups are **not** random, but somehow occur only after some time has elapsed from the last power cycle, and this time is longer than one day.

On the contrary if the lookups are truly random, then a reboot every 24h just ensures that the longest down-time is less than 24h. If it is impossible to avoid random lookups then the most sensible solution would be a watchdog timer. This way you  can ensure that bus down time is shorter that the watchdog time interval itself.

Stefano


_______________________________________________
Owfs-developers mailing list
Owfs-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/owfs-developers
_______________________________________________
Owfs-developers mailing list
Owfs-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/owfs-developers

Reply via email to