I have a feew images I use within OH via URL. This is important as I persist al items and images will explode by DB immidiately while I have not found a way to exclude single items from persisting.
In principle I can include the URL perfectly! I realized that some of the URLs are also accessible when accessing the mail UI remotely (via myopenhab) either via app and / or via browser. I also doubled checked the URLs and some of them are local IPs (such as 192.168.xyz).
I try to understand first what the mechanisms is when accessing images using URLs via app / browser remotely.
You cannot exclude only a single Item but there are ways to manage persistence so that these are not saved. It’s probably a whole lot less work than the path you are heading down. One approach includes: Design Pattern: Group Based Persistence
Note, if you are using rrd4j images are not supported so not saved anyway.
The openHAB cloud server only acts as a proxy to OH. It can only access web pages and files that are hosted by OH itself. It will not give you acces to any files or any other services on your LAN.
If you have static images, you can place them in $OH_CONF/html and access them via https://home.myopenhab.org/static/nameoffile.png. But if the file is in some other folder or served by some other service (e.g. has 192.168… in the address) it’s not supported. Essentially, when you are remote, any URL on your UI must be directly accessible from the Internet or it must be something served up by openHAB itself.
Regarding group based persistance: This is an alternative but would cost be dramatic rework as I have a lot of items / groups. Especially currently the items I would like not to persist are part of items I would like to perrstist due to the semantic model. I could add more groups in parallel for persistance but this leads to kind of “over-grouping” while I do not understand the missing option to just exclude items from persisting.
Regarding images. Looks like I waas lucky for some remote images stored on on-openhab server. But I understand the concept and need to think how to fix.
There is no such thing as “over grouping”. Groups server different pusposes based on their context. It is exepcted that you would use Groups outside of the semantic model for functional things like this. Roughly 60%-75% of your Items should be in the semantic model. It’s perfectly fine to have Items outside the model.
Because it’s not implemented that way and there are significant technical challenges to implement that feature and because of that no one has volunteer to implement it.
