I might add that if you use MQTT as the driver then you would not need 
'any' ecowitt driver at all to handle incoming data.  Just a standalone 
service to handle how to backfill the db from the saved files on the 
gateway SD card.     MQTTSubscribe driver + ecowitt backfill service.  Or 
Ecowitt backfill-only driver + MQTTSubscribe as a service.  Whatever makes 
most sense.

On Tuesday, October 14, 2025 at 9:59:58 AM UTC-7 vince wrote:

> We can disagree.  I disagree.  Some thoughts:
>
>    - Re: payloads - if somebody is going to emit MQTT then follow the 
>    spec and emit 'valid' MQTT.  That simple. Ecowitt emitting a WU-centric 
>    HTTP POST header and content in their MQTT output 'and' using the wrong 
>    delimiter to match a legacy Weather Underground expectation is simply 
> lazy. 
>      All they did is reuse their post code and emit it as an invalid MQTT 
>    payload.  That is weak.
>
>
>    - Furthermore, WU as a service continues to degrade and nobody can 
>    predict when that service will eventually go under.  They're yesterday's 
>    news.  Ecowitt is emitting invalid format data centered around a company 
>    that is a decade into its spiral toward going out of business.  Nobody can 
>    predict what the private equity company that purchased WU last year from 
>    IBM will do, or not do.
>    
>
>    - Re: one custom server - my belief is having weewx and a 'weewx' 
>    driver implies that the user is going to have weewx do the heavy lifting, 
>    so to speak, for posting to Internet sites.  So ecowitt hardware/software 
>    being limited to only one custom server location is irrelevant. If you're 
> a 
>    weewx site you do not 'need' more than one custom server enabled.
>
>
>    - It doesn't matter how often the gateway can emit MQTT if the sensors 
>    do not 'measure' their hardware that frequently.  Other than trying to 
>    capture very rapid wind changes, I see no value in worrying trying to be 
>    faster than 8 seconds between measures (using your numbers), or MQTT 
>    posting every 10 seconds which is how fast my GW1200 can post.
>
> If you want to see a company that does APIs 'well', look at WeatherFlow 
> and their UDP local and REST/websockets APIs.  They are well documented. 
>  They keep them up to date.  They have worked from the beta days before 
> their first product even existed pre-release.  Regardless of whether you 
> might consider  their gear is/isn't good enough, they certainly did that 
> part very well.
>
> My belief is that setting the gateway to emit MQTT (and leveraging Rich's 
> excellent MQTTSubscribe driver/extension) is the most standard, modern and 
> sustainable way to deal with Ecowitt, although backfill and Ecowitt having 
> yet another way they save data to deal with is a problem in itself.
>
> For a no-backfill-required site, such as mine here, MQTT is by 'far' the 
> simplest way to deal with ecowitt's oddities.
>
> On Tuesday, October 14, 2025 at 1:06:24 AM UTC-7 Rainer Lang wrote:
>
>> from a wider perspective as weewx is certainly not the navel of the world 
>> as we say in my language:
>> using MQTT for a customized server posting in an Ecowitt console is not 
>> helpful if another customized server target is also already used or needed 
>> - there is not more than one per console
>> that's where the API requests drivers bring in their advantages including 
>> polling interval advantages while customized server posting is limited to 8 
>> seconds (and users of a WS80 appreciate their 4.75 second sensor data 
>> update interval - and leaving the customized server post feature free for 
>> other needs
>>
>> the move from the binary API to the http API is imho the right thing to 
>> do.
>> Complaining about payload content is not going to lead anywhere - why 
>> would they create a new payload content for every protocol supported ?
>> Obviously, people using e.g. HomeAssistant and use the Ecowitt MQTT posts 
>> manage well - even though there is now a local http API based HA 
>> integration which reads the console data in real time - the equivalent of 
>> the weewx local http API driver which in my observation is very close to 
>> being complete. 🙂
>> Good, even excellent work Ian, Werner, Michael etc. !!
>> On 13.10.2025 20:27, vince wrote:
>>
>> On Monday, October 13, 2025 at 9:45:57 AM UTC-7 steepleian wrote:
>>
>> So maybe the perfect solution is MQTT with a backfill process built in?
>>
>>
>> Uncertain.  Some folks might not want to run a MQTT broker although it's 
>> easy and lightweight on Linux.
>>
>> Ecowitt uses so many formats and naming conventions that it's difficult 
>> to suggest what the best path forward might be.  I certainly find the MQTT 
>> easier to read and should be far easier to program to (for me at least) 
>> since we already have the nice MQTTSubscribe driver/extension that can 
>> handle the annoyances in how Ecowitt returns the MQTT data.
>>
>> Re: content.....
>>
>> MQTT seems more current than the HTTP API data for my gw1200 running 
>> latest firmware that came out recently:
>>
>>    - MQTT has additional info missing from HTTP (vpd, soil moisture ADC 
>>    value, gateway model, gateway freq) 
>>    - MQTT and HTTP report battery levels much differently it seems 
>>    - MQTT makes absolute and relative pressure easily both available, 
>>    HTTP has an item that 'seems' to be the offset in kPa (?) 
>>    - HTTP structure for how it reports rain is just odd.  They have 
>>    hardware info in the same element as the yearly rain totals 
>>    - HTTP is also odd in their model identifiers.  My gw1200 inside 
>>    temp/hum/pressure info comes up as being from a wh25 (!!!!) 
>>    - getting HTTP data can mean dealing with that horrid "page=N" thing 
>>    and assembling things from multiple pages of data 
>>       - http://x.x.x.x/get_sensors_info?page=1
>>       - http://x.x.x.x/get_sensors_info?page=2
>>       - then assembling them in some order based on type id value 
>>    
>> That said....Ecowitt MQTT isn't perfect either
>>
>>    - sensor RSSI and 'signal' (whatever that is) is only available via 
>>    HTTP get_sensors_info if that matters to you 
>>    - and MQTT returns a HTTP POST header and multiple blank lines, using 
>>    WU protocol formatting with & rather than , as the delimeter, but folks 
>>    have already reported and worked that issue here with how to set up 
>>    MQTTSubscribe to deal with that annoyance so while it's ugly it's easy to 
>>    work around 
>>
>> I'll attach a txt file with the data I see here with a little light 
>> editing to make it easier to go through.....
>>
>> -- 
>> 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 visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/weewx-user/c1c94948-8e21-4249-85da-fd4aaa726127n%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/weewx-user/c1c94948-8e21-4249-85da-fd4aaa726127n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>>

-- 
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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/weewx-user/60800b0f-71fd-4137-b277-a17a6be0f288n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to