[rules-users] rules-users Digest, Vol 44, Issue 16

[Edson Tirelli]

   Ok, can you please open a JIRA with a test case for me to reproduce the
problem? I will investigate.

   Thanks,
       Edson

2010/7/6 Axelrod, Nelson <naxelrod at jcvi.org>

> Hi Edson,
>
> Yes, I have been writing and checking the audit log.  It shows several
> activations of the "test" rule, and I've pasted them below if that
> helps.  There are no other activation events with fact handles to [19,
> 6313, 3681] except for the "test" rule.
>
> These two rules intentionally do not have any side effects written in
> the RHS, specifically to avoid the case that an activation of one rule
> would somehow lead to a change affecting the LHS of another rule or any
> other side effects.  I load all of the facts before the rules, and no
> other code is executed except for the KnowledgeSession fireAllRules()
> method followed by dispose().
>
> <org.drools.audit.event.ActivationLogEvent>
>  <type>4</type>
>  <activationId>test [19, 6313, 3681]</activationId>
>  <rule>test</rule>
>  <declarations>f=Feature.ORF00019(19);
> hit=org.jcvi.annotation.facts.HmmHit.ORF00019.TIGR00549.ABOVE_TRUSTED.13
> 836
> 502(3681); p=FeatureProperty.TIGR00549(6313)</declarations>
> </org.drools.audit.event.ActivationLogEvent>
> <org.drools.audit.event.ActivationLogEvent>
>  <type>6</type>
>  <activationId>test [19, 6313, 3681]</activationId>
>  <rule>test</rule>
>  <declarations>f=Feature.ORF00019(19);
> hit=org.jcvi.annotation.facts.HmmHit.ORF00019.TIGR00549.ABOVE_TRUSTED.13
> 836
> 502(3681); p=FeatureProperty.TIGR00549(6313)</declarations>
> </org.drools.audit.event.ActivationLogEvent>
> <org.drools.audit.event.ActivationLogEvent>
>  <type>7</type>
>  <activationId>test [19, 6313, 3681]</activationId>
>  <rule>test</rule>
>  <declarations>f=Feature.ORF00019(19);
> hit=org.jcvi.annotation.facts.HmmHit.ORF00019.TIGR00549.ABOVE_TRUSTED.13
> 836
> 502(3681); p=FeatureProperty.TIGR00549(6313)</declarations>
> </org.drools.audit.event.ActivationLogEvent>
>
> Nelson
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 12:39:22 -0400
> From: Edson Tirelli <tirelli at post.com>
> Subject: Re: [rules-users] How is this possible?
> To: Rules Users List <rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <AANLkTik_Ge7ay6M4gcakpUAgccshwCmU7ke2IYNFJhg6 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
>   Nelson,
>
>   How do you know one rule is firing, but not the other? Are you
> checking
> the audit log or using an agenda listener for that? Otherwise, if you
> think
> the rule is not firing because of your println in the consequence, you
> might
> be looking at the wrong "symptom". There is a huge difference between
> writing an "if" like that in the consequence of a rule and writing a
> constraint like "hitId == "TIGR00549"" in the condition of the rule,
> because
> the LHS of a rule is evaluated at "insert" time while the RHS is
> evaluated
> at the consequence fire time.
>
>   So, from the information given, trying to imagine a scenario to
> explain
> why the syserr in the "test" rule shows up while the one in the first
> rule
> doesn't, here is a possible explanation:
>
> * You insert the fact HmmHit, it activates both rules, but in a given
> time,
> before the "Hmm Hit" rule is fired, the value of hitId changes. In this
> case, the rule would still fire, but the "if" in the consequence is only
> evaluated after the change (during consequence fire time) and so
> evaluates
> to false, not printing the message.
>
>   This is a pretty simple use case and we have several customers/users
> with
> thousands of rules and millions of facts in a single session and they
> are
> not facing anything like you described. So, while a bug is always a
> possible
> explanation, we need a way to reproduce your problem in order to give
> you a
> proper answer.
>
>    Edson
>
> *******************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>



-- 
 Edson Tirelli
 JBoss Drools Core Development
 JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20100706/f5a58195/attachment.html