[rules-users] ClassCastException on session.insert(object)

[Heyns, Juan]

We are using all the dependencies that is distributed with the
binary release for 4.0.1. The problem also occurs intermittently 
so I think we can rule out dependency problems? 

I figured so much... I will probably have to get more information
the problem I have is that this problem has only been encountered
when the application is deployed to the application server. 

There is no stacktrace attached to the ClassCastException which makes
debugging more difficult. Together with the fact that we are using
an older Eclipse IDE which does not support the Drools-tools.

BTW do anybody have any tips on debugging rules? I suppose I should
RTFM, unfortunately it is a lot to consume at once.

Thanks for the help.
Juan




-----Original Message-----
From: rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Mark Proctor
Sent: 18 October 2007 01:37 PM
To: Rules Users List
Cc: juan.heyns at epiuse.com
Subject: Re: [rules-users] BRMS

most classcastexceptions come from having the wrong dependencies on the 
parth, particulalry MVEL. We are putting out 4.0.3 on monday, I would 
recommend you upgrade to this and make sure you are using all the 
correct dependencies. If you continue to have problems you will need to 
be more explicit than you have been below, there is't much we can do 
with that information.

Mark
Heyns, Juan wrote:
> Hello guys,
>
> I am getting some pretty erratic behavior with 4.0.1 at times. 
>
> I have couple of some simple rules, sometimes when I insert 
> objects from the my code. I get a ClassCastException with all
> the exception properties such as "description", "cause", etc. 
> set to NULL. 
>
> This problem only comes up once in a while and when I redeploy
> the library to the J2EE application server the problem seems to
> go away.
>
> I know this is vague... could there be some bug in drools that
> is causing this. Or is there cases where session.insert(object)
> should throw a ClassCastException?
>
> Regards
> Juan
>
> "Employees of Lonmin Platinum ("Lonplats") are not authorised to conclude
> electronic transactions or to enter into electronic agreements on behalf
> of Lonplats. Any electronic signature (other than an advanced electronic
> signature as defined in the Electronic Communications and Transactions
> Act of 2003) added to a data message (such as an email or an attachment
> to an (email) ostensibly on behalf of Lonplats by a Lonplats employee shall
> not be legally binding on Lonplats and Lonplats shall incur no liability of
> any nature whatsoever, directly or indirectly, arising from such act on the
> part of it's employee. It is further recorded that nothing (other than an
> advanced electronic signature) inserted into any data message
> emanating from Lonplats shall be construed as constituting an electronic
> signature"
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>   

_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users at lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users

"Employees of Lonmin Platinum ("Lonplats") are not authorised to conclude
electronic transactions or to enter into electronic agreements on behalf
of Lonplats. Any electronic signature (other than an advanced electronic
signature as defined in the Electronic Communications and Transactions
Act of 2003) added to a data message (such as an email or an attachment
to an (email) ostensibly on behalf of Lonplats by a Lonplats employee shall
not be legally binding on Lonplats and Lonplats shall incur no liability of
any nature whatsoever, directly or indirectly, arising from such act on the
part of it's employee. It is further recorded that nothing (other than an
advanced electronic signature) inserted into any data message
emanating from Lonplats shall be construed as constituting an electronic
signature"