This device
http://www.cd-jackson.com/index.php/zwave/zwave-device-database/zwave-device-list/devicesummary/116
is actually a FGR222 (newer version) of the (older) FGRM222 (http://www.cd-jackson.com/index.php/zwave/zwave-device-database/zwave-device-list/devicesummary/413)
so it just needs to be renamed (devices are working fine with the database parameters).
Is it safe to just rename the newer one from FGRM222 to FGR222 or will it break the config?
Great stuff - thanks.
Up to you - it would of course be very appreciated if you did though 
.
It’s safe. The config uses the unique reference field - if you change that, then it might mean that people need to delete/re-add the device to get the config running again. If you wanted to do it, then after 2.2 might be a good time as this will be required once the dev branch gets merged anyway…
I fixed a couple of the devices I use. Overall, most of them were in good shape.
I also fixed the names of some Leviton devices to make them consistent with the others (removed the .XXX extension).
@chris I’m happy to fix more devices even if I don’t use them. Is it possible to produce a report out of the database showing all devices that have the error. If you post that report here, those of us with too much time on their hands can work on the fixes… 
Nice! Thanks.
No errors:
http://www.cd-jackson.com/index.php/zwave/zwave-device-database/zwave-device-list/devicesummary/238
http://www.cd-jackson.com/index.php/zwave/zwave-device-database/zwave-device-list/devicesummary/45
http://www.cd-jackson.com/index.php/zwave/zwave-device-database/zwave-device-list/devicesummary/4
Warnings and errors:
http://www.cd-jackson.com/index.php/zwave/zwave-device-database/zwave-device-list/devicesummary/42
Parameters 3 and 4 descriptions are too long and contain HTML. I made the edits to clear the warnings.
http://www.cd-jackson.com/index.php/zwave/zwave-device-database/zwave-device-list/devicesummary/84
Parameters 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 are too long.
Parameter 255 is all upper case
Endpoint 0, 1, 2, and 3 have no command class.
The descriptions look good. I could move the ranges to the Overview to clear the alert but that seems excessive.
Parameter 255 was edited to clear the all upper case.
I don’t know where to look for the Endpoint errors. I looked for the node.xml and discovered that the XML doesn’t exist. Perhaps that is why this device isn’t working for me right now. This will take some looking on my part. Weirdly it is showing as online but hasn’t reported any data in quite some time (I don’t have anything that depends on this device except for a single chart.
http://www.cd-jackson.com/index.php/zwave/zwave-device-database/zwave-device-list/devicesummary/66
Says there are no channels assigned even though there are user configurable channels. This is a range extender so I’m not sure what sort of channels it would use.
There is one association group not linked to the controller. Is it safe to just edit that for someone who does not know Zwave that well? I don’t know the implication of doint that.
Endpoint 0 has no command class.
Thanks Rich,
Probably it’s safe to ignore these - I guess the main one is “no basic class selected for endpoint X” (or similar). I probably should hide this for some devices as it’s not always applicable.
Yes - quite possibly. If there’s no XML, then it means the device hasn’t initialised fully, and likely means there’s a quirk in the device that we need to work around. The thing to do is to get a debug log of the initialisation to see what’s up.
Agreed - ignore this 
.
Yes - it’s highly likely it’s ok - it almost certainly can’t do any harm.
As above, there’s not always a need to link this. Notification sensors for example normally aren’t linked (ie door sensors, smoke, pir etc…). Switches and dimmers it’s important - it means that the “Basic” box in the endpoint isn’t ticked for the BINARY_SWITCH, or MULTILEVEL_SWITCH class.
I’ve found a whole bunch of devices where the thing-id contains the manufacturer name.
I could fix that after 2.2 if you want me to 
Hi Sihui
It’s probably not worth worrying about unless the thing ids are really long. I’ve seen the database reporting this warning for some GE devices and it’s not such an issue really.
I added that more to remind me to check the thing id when adding new devices as sometimes people write fubaro…
Thanks for the work on this 
Cheers
Chris
That’s fine with me.
I think I catched all the other “value is greater” errors, but I did not touch the “duplicated thing id” because I don’t have all those devices 
and it is not alway obvious which thing id could be deleted or moved to another device.
Ol, thanks for putting the time into this. I hope to do an update tonight if I get some time.
Cheers
Chris
Steinel IS140-2 Motion detector
[http://www.cd-jackson.com/index.php/zwave/zwave-device-database/zwave-device-list/devicesummary/630]
@nork and @Hoagie are describing errors with this device in the comments of the zwave-device-database.
Perhaps it is better to delete the device from the database.
It would probably be best if someone fixed the channels. I’ve not seen anything that says what’s wrong, just that it doesn’t work…
Done.
Hi @chris,
I guess, there is an error in the z-wave-database.
2 devices of my z-wave-network from Popp are battery-powered:
Popp 0044007 and Popp 0044001.
I’m using this devices in my z-wave-net. Other devices are using this Popp-devices as a relay.
The new batteries (9V) were empty within one night!
In habmin- things- characteristics the routing is activated. (green hook). Is this correct?
The z-wave-network-viewer (habmin) confirms this guess.
For all I know, battery devices cannot be a z-wave-relay.
Thank you for your support.
Joe
Sorry, but I’m not sure what is the error you are reporting? 
If the device is a battery device, then it won’t be used as a relay. Only mains devices are used for routing.
This shows neighbors - not routes. It’s not the same thing and the existence of a link doesn’t mean something is being used for routing.
Yes, this is correct.
Cheers
Chris
I just bought a Nexa AN179 (which seems to be a rebrand of the Everspring AN179), but noticed that there’s an error in the database. Is there anything I can do to correct this?
And will this update be included in the stable version of the binding, or do I need to switch to the development version?
http://www.cd-jackson.com/index.php/zwave/zwave-device-database/zwave-device-list/devicesummary/28
Thanks in advance!
Fixed.
Probably there is the need to create a new database entry because of the different manufacturer.
Include the device and check it. If it is properly included as Everspring device check if the device type and device id are the same.
If not, upload your xml file and create a new entry or post it here so we can do it.
Either to a recent snapshot or the development version. It won’t work with the stable zwave binding version.
On the z-wave alliance website only the Everspring device is listed, but they have the same product id, so I guess it’s exactly the same. It won’t bother me if it has another name in OpenHAB.
Been thinking of upgrading for a while, guess it’s time now!
Thanks for the info!
