On Monday, March 19, 2018 at 9:36:44 PM UTC-4, Rod M wrote: > > Does anyone think implementing this would effectively be much more data > efficient compared to my current approach of ftp of html files? Would MQTT > have a fit here? I can live with the 2 hourly update and current data usage. > rod,
MQTT is almost certainly the most efficient transfer protocol. however, if you use MQTT then you would transfer only the data - this means you would have to do the creation of reports at the server, not at the weather station. lets say that each LOOP packet or archive record is about 1000 bytes of data. that means: LOOP: 1000 bytes every 2.5 seconds 2880 uploads every two hours 2.88MB transferred every 2 hours archive: 1000 bytes every 5 minutes 24 uploads every two hours 24KB transferred every 2 hours so if data transfer costs are killing you, you could use MQTT to upload archive records. that would give you a 5 minute refresh instead of 2 hours and still use considerably less data than the 180KB per 2 hours you reported for ftp. one way to implement this would be to use weewx at the weather station as you do now, and a second weewx instance at the receiving end. at the weather station, install the weewx-mqtt uploader extension and turn off ftp. at the receiving end, run weewx with the weewxMQTT driver. m -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "weewx-user" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
