New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Issue 371 cli command for creating a schedule #372
Conversation
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
…tions, too Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 1935835862
💛 - Coveralls |
Does soc translate well to assets other than batteries? I was planning on an automated test for the toy-account CLI command. I'd expect we make a test only for this if it's not too much trouble. |
No, not to assets with shifting flexibility, for example, but it does translate well to assets with storage or buffer flexibility.
Okay. And do the current CLI options work well for the tutorial, or would you like to see adjustments / smarter defaults? For example, starting the schedule now and ending the schedule some default duration from now. |
Two ideas to simplify:
|
Could |
For flexibility, but probably also for ease of use in many use cases, I believe it might be helpful to use
|
…formation available? Signed-off-by: Nicolas Höning <nicolas@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Höning <nicolas@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Höning <nicolas@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Höning <nicolas@seita.nl>
This review is not in-line, but rather comments, sorry. Most of them are about making it slightly easier to use. I made a few light additions to the CLI command, and one small fix. Also, here is a successful run. I believe it seems to work, I only have to small observations on the generated data, which get me a bit confused. For the tutorial, we could show the schedule as it is visualised in the UI, so I'm happy to see as issues handled outside of this PR if that works better: Here are my asset and charging sensor:
I used these prices:
With this command:
lead to this schedule:
In general, I see it works: charge in the first hour (cheapest), discharge at 4 to 5pm (highest price).
|
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
… beliefs) Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
I checked the code to see where the horizon was being determined. The horizon was indeed off, but only by the knowledge horizon (in your case, that should have been just 15 minutes). I fixed this just now in b6603de. I believe an explanation for the remaining discrepancy (you expected something like 2 days instead of 3 days) should be found in your interpretation of printed negative timedeltas (which, I'll admit, is definitely confusing):
|
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
… transitions Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Höning <nicolas@seita.nl>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the improvements! The only things I'd do (if possible) would be
- add the command to changelog and cli/changelog
- change factor-id to optimization-context-id
- write a quick test, but I believe there is no quick test for this. We probably are testing the scheduling code already somewhere else in API tests. The only thing to be tested really would be if the command translates CLI input to function parameters, which could be done with a monkeypatch of
make_schedule
. But I'm okay with not having that, so we can move on snd use this.
One more thing: I now realise that What would you recommend ― are both of these the most natural units? |
…rshmallow Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
…or ratios for the round-trip efficiency Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
# Conflicts: # documentation/changelog.rst
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <felix@seita.nl>
@nhoening to test out, I suggest you adjust this to fit your tutorial:
I hope it fits what you had in mind.
Are you planning to add an automated test that follows your tutorial?
closes #371