On Tuesday, 9 February 2021 at 19:40:43 UTC+10 Jan-Jaap van der Geer wrote:
> On Tuesday, 9 February 2021 at 10:23:40 UTC+1 gjr80 wrote: > >> To clarify, the archive interval coming from the driver or weewx.conf is >> quite acceptable. >> >> If a driver has the ability to emit archive records then it MAY also >> control the archive period (by the same token it may not). Consequently, if >> you are using driver emitted archive records (ie hardware record >> generation) WeeWX will look to the driver for the archive interval during >> startup. If the driver provides the archive interval then WeeWX will use >> that instead of the weewx.conf archive_interval setting. If the driver does >> not provide the archive interval WeeWX will fallback to the weewx.conf >> value. > > > Hm, OK, interesting. That's not how I read the documentation. I > interpreted it to say that if you implement genArchiveRecords() you should > (interpreted as 'must') provide the archive_interval. You seem to imply > that that is not necessarily the correct interpretation. I will investigate > this. > You can implement genArchiveRecords() and not have the driver provide archive_interval. The different hardware for most drivers where I have seen genArchiveRecords() implemented have some form of logger/memory that stores archive record type data at some hardware defined/set interval, in such cases it makes sense for the driver to override archive interval in weewx.conf. That being said there is no requirement for that to be so, hence why you see words like ‘if’ and not ‘must’. Gary -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "weewx-development" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to weewx-development+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/weewx-development/5e766b76-7c0a-4c23-a31b-71d3b8989c67n%40googlegroups.com.
