[rules-users] How to write a rule like this

[Wolfgang Laun]

If there may be two EventA with the same timestamp, additional
constraints may be necessary, and
after may have to be used with a start time of 0ms:

 $a1: EventA( $index : index )
 $a2: EventA( this != $a1 && after[0ms] $a1, index == $index )
 $a3: EventA( this != $a1 && != $a2 && after[0ms] $a2, index == $index )

-W


2010/10/26 赵侃侃 <kevin223 at gmail.com>:
> Hello,
> Hello,
> I just tried this rule, but it doesn't seem to work as expected.
> What I have now is every time I have an EventA received then a pattern is
> reported matched no matter whether any of the other constrains is met.
> Any ideas?
> Best Regards,
> Kevin Zhao
>
> 2010/10/26 Michael Anstis <michael.anstis at gmail.com>
>>
>> You could try this too; if you don't want lots of new attributes for your
>> model:-
>>
>> rule "three A"
>> when
>>   $a1: EventA( $index : index )
>>   $a2: EventA( index == $index )
>>   $a3: EventA( index == $index )
>>   not PatternConsumer( name == 'AAA', events contain $a1 || contais $a2 ||
>> contains $a3)
>>   not EventB( this after[0ms] $a1 && before[0ms] $a3, index == $index )
>> then
>>   // ... match
>>   PatternConsumer pc = new PatternConsumer("AAA", $a1, $a2, $a3 );
>>   insert(pc);
>> end
>>
>>
>> 2010/10/25 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun at gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Giving those other rules a higher salience is one way, but I think
>>> it is better to add a boolean field "usedForAAA" to class EventA.
>>>
>>> rule "three A"
>>> when
>>>   $a1: EventA( $index : index, usedForAAA == false )
>>>   $a2: EventA( index == $index, usedForAAA == false )
>>>   $a3: EventA( index == $index, usedForAAA == false )
>>>   not EventB( this after[0ms] $a1 && before[0ms] $a3, index == $index )
>>> then
>>>   // ... match
>>>   modify( $a1 ){ setUsedForAAA( true ) }
>>>   modify( $a2 ){ setUsedForAAA( true ) }
>>>   modify( $a3 ){ setUsedForAAA( true ) }
>>> end
>>>
>>> -W
>>>
>>>
>>> 2010/10/25 赵侃侃 <kevin223 at gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Wolfgang,
>>>> It now starts to make sense to me. However, is it possible that I don't
>>>> retract those matched eventA? All those events might be used to evaluate
>>>> against other rules.
>>>> Thanks again,
>>>> Kevin Zhao
>>>> 2010/10/25 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun at gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> I assume you are using Fusion, using a session clock so that temporal
>>>>> operators are available.
>>>>>
>>>>> rule "three A"
>>>>> when
>>>>>   $a1: EventA( $index : index )
>>>>>   $a2: EventA( index == $index )
>>>>>   $a3: EventA( index == $index )
>>>>>   not EventB( this after[0ms] $a1 && before[0ms] $a3, index == $index )
>>>>> then
>>>>>   // ... match
>>>>>   retract( $a1 );
>>>>>   retract( $a2 );
>>>>>   retract( $a3 );
>>>>> end
>>>>>
>>>>> -W
>>>>>
>>>>> 2010/10/25 赵侃侃 <kevin223 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>> I'm still quite new to the drools stuffs just getting the examples
>>>>>> running. I'm sorry if my question is too basic.
>>>>>> I have a system that will continuously to receive events sent from
>>>>>> some other system. Basically I have two types of events, eventA and eventB.
>>>>>> Both eventA and eventB have two properties, index and timestamp.
>>>>>> What I want is to capture a pattern to meet the following conditions
>>>>>> 1. every 3 consecutive eventsA without any eventB in between having a
>>>>>> same index value ordering by their timestamp.
>>>>>> 2. all events in a matched pattern will have the same value of
>>>>>> property index.
>>>>>> 3. if a pattern is matched, any of the events in this pattern should
>>>>>> not be used again for a new matching.
>>>>>> there are some examples below, the number after a colon stands for the
>>>>>> value of its index number and assume those events are already ordered by
>>>>>> their timestamp.
>>>>>> eventB:2    eventA:1     eventA:1     eventA:1  eventB:3
>>>>>>  --------- one successful match, we have three eventA with same index value
>>>>>> 1 in a row
>>>>>> eventB:2    eventA:1     eventA:1     eventB:1  eventA:1
>>>>>>  --------- no match because there's an eventB in between
>>>>>> eventB:2    eventA:1     eventA:1     eventB:2  eventA:1
>>>>>>  --------- one successful match because the in-between eventB has a
>>>>>> different index value
>>>>>> eventA:1    eventA:1     eventA:1     eventA:1  eventA:1
>>>>>>  --------- only one match, because once matched, the events can not be used
>>>>>> for a second match again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just don't know how to write a rule like this. Is there anyone who
>>>>>> can shed some lights on?
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>> Kevin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>