Curious that enabling rapid-fire improved reliability for you. I was having reliability issues posting to WU and was told that having it enabled led to problems. So I disabled, and things have been consistently good for me over the past month (i.e. since that change).
On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 1:53:44 PM UTC-4 Doug Bo wrote: > Another data point, my station is missing some location info and > barometric pressure on the Android app. I have verified my upload data on > the WU station web page and everything looks good. One thing WU "lost" is > my hardware type. I have reset the station hardware info so we'll see what > happens. I have also opened a ticket with them on this issue. > FWIW, a few years back WU moved some PWS stations to a new server and > messed up my station. I wonder if they have performed some data house > cleaning and mucked up a few things? > > I'll update the thread when I have additional info. > > Thanks all for the input. > Doug B. > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 9:02:10 AM UTC-7 [email protected] wrote: > >> I might have a hint about this. For quite some time, my VP2 (KAKWASIL2) >> was one of very few PWS in my area. I had the same issues you described, >> where it would disappear from the map but when viewed directly it would be >> uploading. I went through all the troubleshooting steps with WU, and we >> essentially came down to the sanity checks - if your weather is too far off >> the "normal" reports then it's considered "bad" and not displayed until >> "corrected". Thing is, my station is close to town, while the "official" >> airport weather is several miles away and across a small set of hills, so >> can be quite different. With no other reports to compare to, mine was >> considered "off". >> >> As more stations came online, and more data was available, mine became >> "more reliable" since more stations showed similar data. RapidFire adds >> more data into the mix, so if your data is consistent and within certain >> limits, then it's considered "more reliable". Also, if there's other PWS in >> the area and all show similar data it helps. Mine would drop for a day or >> two, then suddenly you'd query for zip 99654 and it would show as the >> official town weather again :-) >> >> WU algorithms are known to be a bit flaky with sanity checks, but have >> gotten much better over the years as more data has come online. Still, if >> you're in an area with somewhat different temp/wind patterns, it can cause >> WU's AI some headaches. >> >> >> On Saturday, August 6, 2022 at 11:21:38 AM UTC-8 Alastair L wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> Many thanks for all your responses and suggestions. As a result I >>> believe I can report success, my station now appears reliably in the WU >>> maps. >>> >>> I checked out the time on both my Pi and the Vantage console against my >>> PC time and all were within seconds of each other. So I tried I editing >>> the rapidfire setting in the config file as suggested and changed it from >>> false to true. For the first time in ages my station (ILAIRG10) appeared >>> on WU maps and continues to appear - great! I've waited some hours >>> to confirm this is not just a fluke, and so far the station appears every >>> time I have I've checked. This hasn't been possible in months. I have >>> wasted a lot of time fretting over this problem and it's great to have a >>> solution. >>> >>> I can see from the weewx log that weewx now sends data to WU every 2 >>> seconds now instead of every 5 minutes previously and that the WU data >>> table still updates every 5 minutes. Curiously the time stamp on my WU >>> data table changed as soon as the rapid fire option was made, from e.g. >>> 2:00PM, 2:05 PM, 2:10 PM etc to e.g 2:34 PM, 2:39 PM, 2:44 PM etc. These >>> post rapidfire change time stamps now precisely align with the other two >>> local stations (that I believe not running on Weewx), but what the >>> significance is escapes me. The comment made regarding WU dropping >>> sites from the map if they aren't uploading reliably looks to have been >>> true for me, but why, to my likely simplistic understanding, firing data at >>> WU 150 times in 5 minutes, instead of a nice sedate once, improves >>> reliability surprises me. I'm not really clear what the logic behind >>> this is but it works for me. Perhaps someone can suggest an explanation? >>> >>> Anyway, I'm happy now and thanks once again to you all for your input. >>> >>> Alastair >>> >>>> >>>> -- 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]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/weewx-user/21cdd755-e20a-4efd-8729-9cd144126d4fn%40googlegroups.com.
