Please note – this blog is WELL out of date and all of my blog items and much, much more have now been moved to http://tech.scargill.net – many of the blog entries have been brought up to date – please visit the new site and register for much more.
Something those of you planning to use your ESP8266 units in remote installations might want to be aware of. I’ve been working with TUAN who developed the MQTT software – now, I’m sure it has nothing to do with his code… but essentially, I’m using his latest software as the basis of a controller.
I’ve added a simple interrupt driven real time clock, refreshed by occasional MQTT message, I control output 0……GPIO0 – and I have a temperature sensor on GPIO2.
All of this works VERY nicely (some new updates from last night you might want to get from the GIT repository) – when the temperature drops below a certain level the output comes on etc, or I can manually turn the output on and off. I can even store settings in FLASH having added a little section to the area that normally holds WIFI settings – all of this works perfectly.
BUT.. has anyone tried turning off the WIFI for a while…. and then turning it back on? Does your little board reconnect every time, reliably? Because in the real world of remote control that will happen. I am finding that this is not always the case, that the code sits and tries to connect, maybe even seems to but ultimately fails. If the ESP SDK comes back with “STATION_CONNECT_FAIL” just what exactly should yo do about it?
Most of the time, simply disconnecting the ESP8266 board sorts the problem – if not the first time, the second time (and that in itself is a worry) – but that is no good if the board is actually controlling something – you can’t just reboot the board, you need to somehow reboot the WIFI while maintaining control over whatever it was you were doing…. or find another way to ensure that the WIFI reconnects every time.
The alternative is to use the board with an Arduino and have the Arduino reset the ESP8266 in the event of communication failure – but that’s really a bit of a cop out.
Thoughts? (this is for C programmers, we’re not talking about LUA though I’m sure that is also worth testing).
Thanks to input here I’ve asked Tuan if it’s possible to update the code using the new 0.9.5 SDK + patch… and we’ll try again!