Hi Werk_AG,
I did some new measurements for 24h. Now the code is a lot better but I try to improve it more!
E.g. setting down timeout limits and trying to detect a "long runner" if there comes no answer or the tcp connection cannot be closed.
One main point I see now is, that sending the data of all extra sensors consumes much time (even more than communication to the wireless displays).
Now I have changed the behaviour of my simulated sensors to real world (but random) values.
As an attachement to this post I have some graphs about:
I did some new measurements for 24h. Now the code is a lot better but I try to improve it more!
E.g. setting down timeout limits and trying to detect a "long runner" if there comes no answer or the tcp connection cannot be closed.
One main point I see now is, that sending the data of all extra sensors consumes much time (even more than communication to the wireless displays).
Now I have changed the behaviour of my simulated sensors to real world (but random) values.
As an attachement to this post I have some graphs about:
- comparison: send extra sensors vs communication with 4 TCP sensors
- Wifi_Sensors: comparison with all 4 Sensors
- Wifi_Extra: comparison of the sum of WIFI and the sum of sending extra sensor data
- tcp now is pretty fast
- sending the new data out (via 433) consumes some time
- there was one error and the tcp connection could not be closed, what lead to a timeout of around 8000ms (Right now I cannot determine, if it was the wireless display, or a rasp - because the time of "sensor 2" data has been left out, so I only know the time sum of 1+2)
- local sensors are faster
- two identical raspberry pis are different, because one sits in a metal case


